Historic forced adoption - scoping study: final report

1. Introduction and context

Historic forced adoption refers to practices across the UK, Ireland, Canada and Australia in the 1950s-1970s “which resulted in newborn babies being unnecessarily taken away from unmarried mothers and placed for adoption, without regard for the mothers' and children's needs or wishes”^[3].

An unknown number of families in Scotland were affected by historic forced adoption. These traumatic experiences had enduring impacts on health and wellbeing. There is a growing movement of advocacy to gain further recognition of, and more support for, the many affected people and a focus by policymakers on how to respond to their needs.

In June 2021, the then First Minister committed to considering the issue of historic forced adoption in Scotland fully. In a significant development, the First Minister formally apologised to people affected by historic forced adoption on behalf of the Scottish Government on 22 March 2023.

The Scottish Government is undertaking a range of thematic work on historic forced adoption, including gathering evidence on experiences of historic forced adoption and a survey of people affected; assessing the services required to meet their needs; and investing in measures to support parents and families affected, such as counselling.

As part of this work, in January 2023 the Scottish Government commissioned The Lines Between (TLB) to conduct a scoping study to explore support services for people affected by historic forced adoption. The study aims to:

• Identify existing support services in Scotland.
• Understand the guidelines and training materials for GPs and mental health professionals related to supporting people affected by historic forced adoption practices.
• Engage with people who have lived experience of historic forced adoption in Scotland and gather their views on what new or additional support services are needed.

The research considers the following key questions:

• What services are available for post-adoption support in Scotland, and are these services available and suitable for those who have experienced historic forced adoption?
• What are the relative benefits and weakness of these services?
• What are the self-perceived therapeutic needs of those who have experienced historic forced adoption, and how do these needs vary between parents and adoptees?
• What are specific support services required for parents and adoptees?
• What services are available in other countries/regions?

Adoptees’ experiences

Most feedback from adoptees relates to the experience of being adopted in general and is not directly related to the forced or coercive nature of the adoption. Generally, the issues reported by adoptees stem from their experience of being adopted and are not specifically related to whether their adoption was forced. Indeed, five of the 19 adoptees who took part in interviews did not know enough about their early years to be certain that their adoption was forced, but their adoption took place in the era of forced adoptions and they were keen to take part to describe their experiences of being adopted.

Many adoptees involved in our study gave positive feedback about their experience of life with their adoptive families. Most, however, reported negative impacts of being an adoptee, even where they had a good relationship with their adoptive family. A sizeable minority recounted negative experiences with their adoptive families, including cruel, abusive or negligent treatment.

It is important to note, that research participants were self-selecting and these findings are not intended to be representative of all adoptees’ experience. In addition, while many adoptees commented on adoption in general, this study is not intended as a review of adoption practices in general or of the wider impact of adoption on adopted people either now or historically. However, adoptees’ feedback provides valuable insight into the experience and needs of adoptees born in the period (1950-1970s) and wider insights into the context in which parents and adoptees experienced historic forced adoption.

Methodology

Appendix 1 contains full details of the research methodology, which included:

• A review of key literature.
• Interviews with 32 stakeholders, including adoption agencies, campaigners, academics, and local authority representatives, the majority of whom were social work practitioners.
• Responses from 19 officers, mostly social workers, to an online survey of local authorities. Five of the 19 also took part in a follow-up interview.
• Interviews with 37 people affected by historic forced adoption, including 14 mothers, 19 adoptees, two siblings of adoptees whose mothers had a baby removed for adoption before they themselves were born, one sibling of a mother, and a husband of a mother.
• Survey responses from 11 adoptees, two parents and three wider family members of adopted babies.

Appendix 2 contains our research tools.

Research design

The methodology was predominantly qualitative, reflecting the complex, sensitive, wide-ranging and personal experiences explored in this research. Key data collection activities included in-depth interviews with people affected by historic forced adoption and other stakeholders (including professionals working in post-adoption support, campaigners and academics). This allowed the research team to explore individuals’ experiences and views in depth and to ask probing follow-up questions as necessary.

Online surveys, including qualitative and quantitative questions, offered an alternative method for contributing to the study for people affected by historic forced adoption who felt uncomfortable speaking to an interviewer about their experience. While these surveys achieved a relatively low response, they were not intended as the main data collection method, as this would have detracted from the qualitative, exploratory nature of the research. However, the information gathered through the surveys provided useful additional evidence that was analysed alongside the interviews.

In addition, an online survey of local authority representatives allowed the team to maximise the reach of the study, alongside the stakeholder interviews. Fourteen respondents took part in the survey, spanning ten local authorities.

Research limitations

The findings are based on a thematic analysis of interview transcripts and survey responses from people affected by historic forced adoption and stakeholders. The number of people who experienced historic forced adoption is unknown, but this will likely be quite a small proportion of all those affected.

The research team tried to recruit participants affected by historic forced adoption including mothers, fathers, adoptees and wider family members. However, we did not interview any fathers of adopted babies or wider family members, except one sister of a mother whose baby was adopted and a husband of a mother.

This was a relatively small-scale qualitative study designed to gather in-depth information about the experiences of people affected by historic forced adoption and professionals working in the field. It is important to note that participants were self-selecting, and the findings are not intended to be representative of the whole population affected by historic forced adoption. A larger scale study would be required to achieve this.

However, the depth and detail provided in responses, and the wider awareness of other cases that campaigners and other stakeholders brought to the research, means we have collected a substantial evidence base of the impact of historic forced adoption and the support needs of people affected by it.

Experiences of historic forced adoption

The focus of the study is the support needs of people affected by historic forced adoption. However, interviewees shared their experiences of historic forced adoption with us. These provide important contextual information to help understand their support needs, and are summarised in detail in Chapter 2.

Many interviewees said they welcomed the opportunity to provide evidence to the Scottish Government, share their story and be listened to. Indeed, some of the interviews were lengthy, because people wanted to describe their experiences in detail. Given the sensitive nature of the conversations, the researchers took interviewees through an exit process in which information about support services was shared.

Literature review

Appendix 3 contains details of our literature review. Overall, our research findings are consistent with the evidence presented in the literature and add more Scottish-specific information and experiences to the evidence base about historic forced adoption. Our separate service delivery paper contains further references to the literature, particularly examples of good practice from other countries.

A note on terminology

When we refer to 'people affected by historic forced adoption' or 'people with experience of historic forced adoption', this includes parents whose children were removed, other members of families whose children were adopted, adoptees, and adoptive parents and families.

Terminology is a sensitive issue when discussing historic forced adoption. The language used can potentially be re-traumatising and impact people differently, depending on their experience^[4],[5].

We recognise many parents prefer to be described without prefixes such as ‘birth’ mother^[6]. These are felt to limit their role to reproduction and deny their status as a parent^[7] and ongoing bond with their child^[8]. Therefore, we followed Higgins and colleagues^[9] and used the terms ‘mother’, ‘father’ and ‘parent’ wherever possible. However, where we have presented direct quotes from research participants that include the term ‘birth mother’, we have not altered their words.

As highlighted above, the definition of ‘historic forced adoption’ used in this study is practices across the UK, Ireland, Canada and Australia in the 1950s-1970s, ‘which resulted in newborn babies being unnecessarily taken away from unmarried mothers and placed for adoption, without regard for the mothers' and children's needs or wishes’^[10]. However, we recognise some may prefer the terms ‘forced’, ‘closed’, ‘coerced’ or ‘contested’ adoption.

Although this study considers the timeframe of the 1950s, 60s and 70s, cases like this occurred before and after this timescale^[11].

Changes in adoption policy and practice

Current adoption practices differ from the period considered by this study (1950s, 60s and 70s). Now, adoption processes are more transparent, with the Adoption and Children (Scotland) Act 2007 (the Act) placing a legal duty on local authorities to undertake adoption support assessments setting out what assistance, such as support with family contact, is required. The Act also stipulates that when a court is granting an adoption order, the welfare of the child must be the paramount consideration.

The Act places a legal duty on local authorities to provide for an adoption service and recruit, assess and provide training and support to prospective adopters to ensure that they can meet the needs and provide high-quality care to children. All adoption services in Scotland are regulated by the Care Inspectorate using the Health and Social Care Standards. These standards have been developed by the Scottish Government to describe what people should experience from a wide range of care and support services.

Post-adoption support services

Where we use the term ‘post-adoption support services’ in this report, we are referring to organisations that deliver support to people affected by adoption, including current or recent adoptions as well as historic cases. These organisations include adoption agencies such as Barnardo’s, St Andrew’s, St Margaret’s, Scottish Adoption & Fostering. We are also referring to Adoption UK Scotland and Birthlink, organisations that are not registered adoption agencies but do support people affected by adoption, when we use this term.

Upsetting content

This report contains information about experiences of historic forced adoption that readers may find upsetting and distressing.

Report structure

The remainder of the report is structured as follows:

• Chapter 2 contains a brief overview of the experiences of people affected by historic forced adoption.
• Chapter 3 discusses the support needs of people affected by historic forced adoption related to searching for and reuniting with family members they have been separated from by adoption.
• Support needs around access to records are summarised in Chapter 4.
• Needs around the emotional and psychological impact of historic forced adoption are explored in Chapter 5.
• Chapter 6 summarises other support needs.
• Chapter 7 includes barriers and challenges to supporting people affected by historic forced adoption not covered in previous chapters.
• Chapter 8 presents our conclusions and recommendations.
• Appendix 1 contains full details of the research methodology.
• Our research tools are included in Appendix 2.
• The findings of our literature review are outlined in Appendix 3.