This guy is so bonkers I dont know where to start.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/mar/13/inter-racial-adoption-cameron-wrong

Fast-track adoption has happened before. In the 1960s and 70s it relied on society’s abhorrence and unwillingness to listen to the pregnant unmarried female. Women were removed from their community, isolated in mother and baby homes often run by nuns, and then coerced by social workers into signing adoption papers. Then the mothers were shipped back to their community, not to speak of it. Those mother and baby homes were like child farms: the nuns the farmers, the social workers the landowners and prospective parents the consumers.

Last week, Abby Harrison, a mixed-race woman who has been in care, contacted me via Facebook. On Wigan market there were two gollywogs on two market stalls by two entrances. Abby, who has lived in Wigan all her life and has five mixed-race children, politely asked the stallholder if he would mind removing them. He refused. It seems the users of Wigan market and the council owners don’t mind. Cameron is setting out his adoption policy stall in the equivalent of Wigan market, where he knows the majority of consumers will not complain about the policy of fast-tracking black children to be adopted by white families because most of his customers are in fact white. And what’s wrong with a gollywog anyway?

As the only genuinly “so white he’s blue” member of a mixed race household I’m really rather offended by this.

I have a Masters degree, in an Arts subject, and I’m still not sure if either you or the writer of the article quoted are for or against inter-racial adoption.

What is your point please caller ??

P.S and I always tick “pakeha” in ethnic monitoring surveys, or write it in, if anybody thinks that is pertinent. It means White – Other.

Master’s? Wow. You’re quite a credit to your alumnus.

hels – I think the writer is against inter-racial adoption as it deprives the child of their cultural heritage etc.

At least, that’s how it comes across to me.

I can see his point.

Not decided whether I completely agree or not yet.

Not decided whether I completely agree or not yet.

The guy has written a thoroughly nasty article. Dont tie yourself in knots over it.

I have to say I do not know much about this area, but I reckon a decent set of parents is worth more than waiting for years in care or with various foster parents whilst waiting for a connection to a nebulous cultural heritage.

What has Wigan market and two goliwogs at the entrance got to do with adoption, absolutely nothing it apears, just a gratuitous remark to get attention.

Whatever your view on interracial adoption the outcome of LAC [ looked after children] is horendous and anything would be an improvement

The author seems a bit ranty and if he wants to call interracial adoption colonialism then that is ther echoice but I think it is a tad harsh

they may wish to consider why enough black people dont volunteer to adopt arrather than accusing the govt of not attracting enough

My view whatever we do it it wont be worse than bringing kids up in care – that is no way to treat children

the article doesnt make much sense im not sure its nasty though

but imo good parents are better than none at all

although his point about making care better is very good one- if it takes time to find the right parents then children should be in the best possible environment

but im white, middle class and from a happy family so maybe im not best placed to say

but yeah generally the article strikes me as just being anti-cameron bollox

Master’s? Wow. You’re quite a credit to your alumnus

I get that you’re trying to be snarky but I think you mean “alma mater”.

Is it me or is the Guardian becoming more reactionary than The Daily Fail. This article’s like an inverse parody of the mail’s racism. Imagine if Richard Littlejohn had written that white children shouldn’t be adopted by black people for cultural reasons.

I think the authour is unhinged, have you seen his responses to the comments, it doesn’t make any sense and just sounds like Po-Mo bullshit.

I get that you’re trying to be snarky but I think you mean “alma mater”.

‘Zactly. Mine isnt a Masters though, so what would one expect.

When Mrsmitch and myself were going through the adoption process, it was spelled out in no uncertain terms that we wouldnt be allowed to adopt kids that were from a different ethnic background to our own, citing potential loss of cultural identity as the main reason for this. Adoption is potentially a very emotive subject, and so I do my best not to get wound up by the daily mail / express / telegraphs regular accusations of ‘baby snatching’. Try googling the figures for succesful adoptions for last year – it’s sobering to see how many kids are kept in care rather than placed with families that genuinely want them. Dont get me wrong, adopting our two boys is one of the best things I’ve ever done, but the process was a complete pain in the arse.

bwaarp – Member

Is it me or is the Guardian becoming more reactionary than The Daily Fail. This article’s like an inverse parody of the mail.

no- the article is in comment is free which has always had a diverse range of opinions (including the odd nutter)

their live blogs are still the best by a long way imho

I beg to differ Kimbers, Monbiot’s becoming more of a mentalist by the day. The last time I read an article of his he was talking about how those on the right are less intelligent because a flawed scientific paper told him so.

I’m going to stick to reading as dry new’s as possible with as little opinion as possible and get my opinion from more credible well educated publishers such as Nature, New Scientist, etc etc. Instead of reading crap from journalists who usually have no clue.

was the paper flawed or did you just [stupidly] think it was 😉

oh come on monbiot has always been a muppet!

i agree though about decent journals

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2817-rightwing-governments-increase-suicide-rates.html

i also didnt think the article was that bad
http://pss.sagepub.com/content/23/2/187.full

so what have gollywogs got to do with adoption?

So there’s not enough black couples fostering/adopting.

How much exposure do these kids have to their own culture in the care system? Going off the few lines of experiences the growing up in care is pretty rubbish as well.

So what’s the answer?

You’re damned either way and the kids grow up confused, angry or emotionally scared.

Yeah, selection/confirmation bias. The paper decided to correlate IQ against far right and racist/sexist views, it didn’t attempt to correlate far left views with IQ or attempt to correlate racist/sexist views with political views on the far left.

So Monbiots conclusion was pretty hilarious.

The term golliwog is offensive, but only as offensive as people who think gollies should be either banned or hidden away like a dirty secret.

The guardian has always been written by fools who take great pride in pointing at others from their self-impossed high ground, nothing new there.

Is being loved, cared for and feeling safe not more important than cultural identity? It is a tough one though.

so what have gollywogs got to do with adoption?

And this WTF?

having watched the fresh prince of bel air i feel i’m overly qualified to comment on this.

not only does it deal with living with a family that is culturally different from your own, but carlton was an awesome dancer.

i rest my case.

mcboo – Member
Master’s? Wow. You’re quite a credit to your alumnus.

Unlike yourself judging by the endless stream of drivel you post on here

Unlike yourself judging by the endless stream of drivel you post on here

Oh you big bitch you.

Kimbers, for a more reasoned take on the paper see

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2012/01/social-conservatives-have-a-lower-i-q-probably/

Dont get me wrong, adopting our two boys is one of the best things I’ve ever done, but the process was a complete pain in the arse.

My sister adopted two boys, and would whole-heartedly agree.

I reckon a decent set of parents is worth more than waiting for years in care or with various foster parents whilst waiting for a connection to a nebulous cultural heritage.

And I would agree with that.

I’m a proud bleeding heart lefty liberal, but the cultural heritage argument is nonsense. What counts as cultural heritage? A adoptive child’s black mother may be a fifth generation Brit from immigrant great-great-great grandparents. They in that case would be more ‘British’ than me, as my mother is a first generation Irish immigrant. I think we can agree that Ireland has a strong cultural identity. However, and the end of the day we’re both still just British, but with interesting family histories.

SamuelTaylor
13 March 2012 10:46AM
Maybe then you should be telling each one of those children that they aren’t allowed a mummy and daddy unless they have the same skin colour, while you’re at it how about outlawing interracial marriage, those poor children growing up with a white parent. Most foster carers are white, are you going to insist that non-white children are placed in foster homes or care homes solely made of black carers? Unlike you I don’t want segregation of different races, unlike you I also want children in care to go on to find families who love them, not families with similar ancestry.

When I was in care the problem of non-white children remaining in care for a long time was a problem and that is a fairly long time ago, I was allowed access to my parents and so the prospect of adoption was never available to me, in all my time I never saw a non-white child be put forward for adoption, of the five I remained in contact with after leaving three killed themselves and two are in prison.

My partner was a social worker until he became physically disabled, he never had a non-white charge who went on to find a family, because of pathetic rules those children were essentially guaranteed to live a life without family, to be self sufficient from 18 and were almost guaranteed to go to prison. Many non-white children in the UK currently would have better future prospects if they were left with abusive parents, I hope you’re happy to be a public supporter of something so vile.

Good comment from the article.

mcboo – Member

Master’s? Wow. You’re quite a credit to your alumnus.

You haven’t covered your alma mater in glory there either, professor.

An alumnus is a graduate of an educational institution, not the institution itself.

You haven’t covered your alma mater in glory there either, professor.

Yes we have already established that I didnt have the benefit of a classical education. Cheers.

My head hurts, I have read the link twice now and still missing the point, can someone explain in simple terms, sorry, me being not the brightest spark about, what is the link with gollywogs and adoption?

Did not mean to offend anyone, with my first post btw, but genuinely a bit confused with this whole article? 🙁

If I’m to be honest, I think that at the time we were adopting (7 / 8 years ago), the phrase ‘cultural identity’ was a hand wringing and right on way of saying ‘skin colour’ by the social workers, etc, that were involved with our particular case. We were also told directly (by a social worker who has since taken ‘early retirement’) that as our two were adopted they would ‘never be rocket scientists’. I felt then, as I still do, that the focus of attention is always placed on the rights of the birth parents, with the kids themselves and then the adoptive parents very much left to manage as best they can. I’m not saying it’s always this way, just that that’s how we were left feeling.

s – Member
My head hurts, I have read the link twice now and still missing the point, can someone explain in simple terms, sorry, me being not the brightest spark about, what is the link with gollywogs and adoption?

Did not mean to offend anyone, with my first post btw, but genuinely a bit confused with this whole article?

In a nutshell: He says only black people can adopt black/mixed race kids. If there aren’t any black parents available the author would rather see the kids rot in care than have them placed with white parents.

mcboo – Member

You haven’t covered your alma mater in glory there either, professor.

Yes we have already established that I didnt have the benefit of a classical education. Cheers.

Well, lay off the pedantic put-downs, in that case. And don’t be surprised if someone tells you you’re talking out of your alumnus.

eyerideit – Member
the author would rather see the kids rot in care than have them placed with white parents.

i dont think that is entirely true

he also made the point that care should be improved though the gollywog random rant rather detracted from everything else

kimbers – Member

eyerideit – Member
the author would rather see the kids rot in care than have them placed with white parents.
i dont think that is entirely true

Ok, it’s an over simplification – but if there’s no prospective black parents where are the kids to go? Could the care system ever match being brought up in a family?

What counts as cultural heritage? A adoptive child’s black mother may be a fifth generation Brit from immigrant great-great-great grandparents. They in that case would be more ‘British’ than me, as my mother is a first generation Irish immigrant. I think we can agree that Ireland has a strong cultural identity. However, and the end of the day we’re both still just British, but with interesting family histories.

+1

I don’t see what colour has to do with it.

I’m adopted btw.