Written evidence from Lorraine Agu (CFA0110)

HOUSE OF LORDS CHILDREN AND FAMILIES ACT 2014 SELECT COMMITTEE INQURY

Select Committee on the Children and Families, Act 2014

Call for evidence: What has been the effect of the repeal of the requirement to consider ethnicity, religion, race, culture and language in England when placing a child for adoption?

1. Hello, my name is Lorraine Agu. I am a registered social worker and Head of Subject at Leeds Beckett University. I have just submitted (April 2022) for examination my Doctoral thesis entitled “Race Matters: Adoption and Children of Mixed Racial Heritage”. To my knowledge, this is the first study to examine how social workers in England have responded to the repeal of the requirement to consider race, ethnicity, religion, culture and language.

2. There is a lack of contemporary research that has considered the racialised experiences of children within adoption, whereas this research examined the specific experiences of mixed race children, as research has identified that it is these children who are more likely than other racially minoritised children to come into care and to be placed for adoption.  There is existing evidence of racial disproportionality within child welfare as research has identified how a child’s ethnicity can be a major determinant of their care pathway. There is other evidence that social workers struggle to articulate the racial and ethnic identities of children within children’s assessments, and it also suggested that social workers have not fully understood the needs of mixed race children and are unsure whether they should be considered Black, White, or mixed race.

3. Hence this research examined how social workers feel that changes in adoption legislation have influenced the significance of race and ethnicity for mixed race children seeking adoption. It examined how race and ethnicity influence the assessment of needs and decision-making and matching. This research took place in a large local authority and its associated regional adoption agency and through the use of semi-structured interviews with children’s social workers, adoption social workers, an agency decision-maker and a focus group with members of an adoption panel. It examined the influence of race and ethnicity on adoption practice for children of mixed racial backgrounds.

4. Main Findings

•              The research found that despite the removal of the ethnicity clause, race continues to matter for mixed race children within English adoption practice, as the majority of social workers and other professionals considered that children’s racial and ethnic identities were integral to their needs.  A small number of participants felt that the amendment permitted them to consider families from a wider range of ethnicities, however, most felt that the amendment was not required for social workers as they were only required to give due consideration to race and ethnicity.

•              Participants felt that it was in children’s best interests to consider their racial and ethnic identities within assessments and that transracial/transethnic adoption adds extra layers of difference to children’s adoptive and ethnic identities.

•              Social workers were realistic about the possibilities of finding a ‘perfect’ ethnic match and were prepared to change the criteria for matching to avoid delay. However, all participants spoke of a lack of adopters from racially minoritised backgrounds and the difficulty of matching children with families that reflected their backgrounds. This was also due to increased heterogeneity in children’s mixed racial identities as communities have become more diverse. For example, social workers spoke of the specific challenges in finding children from mixed Roma communities.

•              However, the research identified a lack of racial literacy or cultural competence within adoption practice, which was reflected by an inconsistency in how mixed race identities were represented in assessments and reports. For example, there would be a reliance on children’s visual appearance without an understanding of their lived experiences.

•              It was difficult to determine how race, ethnicity and religion were considered in placement decisions, and like other studies, matching decisions were influenced by children's visual appearance and the need for them to fit in with their adoptive families. This study identified gaps in children's social workers’ knowledge and understanding of the development of racial identity in young children and the impact of adoption on racial identity for children of mixed race.

•              The research also identified the existence of bias and prejudice within adoption practice which was reflected by professionals through normative attitudes regarding idealised adoptive families, and also through adopter preferences. It identified ‘newer’ forms of racism and prejudice towards children from Roma backgrounds and adopters from Muslim communities. I would suggest that social workers and adoption panel members would benefit from training that examines practitioner bias and the impact on their practice.

•              The research revealed gaps in assessing and supporting the racial literacy of adoptive parents. I would suggest that issues of race and ethnicity could be incorporated into training for all prospective adopters, with additional training and support for adopters who intend to parent a child of different ethnicity.

Lorraine Agu 22 Apr. 22

May 2022