research on adoption breakdown

Adoption Breakdown: Concept, Research, and Implications

A rich and heterogeneous body of knowledge about adoption breakdown has accumulated in recent years. The goal of this article from the Special Issue on Adoption Breakdown of the journal of Research on Social Work Practice is to review the existing research literature on the topic.

A comprehensive review of journal articles, book chapters, and technical reports addressing the issue of adoption breakdown was conducted.

Terminological and methodological difficulties are discussed before the main findings about the incidence of adoption breakdown are presented. A detailed examination of the child, parent, and support and service characteristics associated with the breakdown experience follows. The review ends with the analysis of some policy and practice implications, as well as with suggestions about how to increase and improve the study of adoption breakdown.

Discussion:

Although research into adoption breakdown has achieved a considerable progress in recent years, improvements are still needed in both the basic research and the applied implications domains.

Copyright ©2024 Better Care Network. All rights reserved.

• Guidelines on Alternative Care
• 2019 UNGA Resolution on the Rights of the Child
• CRC Day of General Discussion (DGD) 2021
• International and Regional Treaties
• Directory of Organisations
• Regions & Countries
• Parenting Support
• Health and Nutrition Programmes
• Education Programmes
• Psychosocial Support
• Household Economic Strengthening
• Child Care and Protection Policies
• Standards of Care
• Data and Monitoring Tools
• Cost of Care and Redirection of Resources
• Social Protection Policies and Programmes
• Child Care and Protection System Reforms
• Non-Formal Mechanisms for Children's Care and Protection
• Social Service Workforce Strengthening
• Foster Care
• Kinship Care
• Adoption and Kafala
• Supported Child Headed Households
• Community Based Care Mechanisms
• Guardianship
• Residential Care
• Assessment and Placement Monitoring
• Child Participation
• Permanency Planning
• Gatekeeping
• Ending Child Institionalization
• Child Development
• Temporary or Interim Care
• Leaving Alternative Care and Reintegration
• Effects of Institutional Care
• Children Affected by HIV and AIDS
• Children Affected by Armed Conflict and Displacement
• Children Living or Working on the Street
• Children with Disabilities
• Child Abuse and Neglect
• Child Exploitation
• Children Affected by Poverty and Social Exclusion
• Children and Migration
• Volunteering and Tourism
• Registration, Documentation and Tracing
• Emergency Care Arrangements
• Practitioner Hub
• History and Mission
• Advisory Board
• Advisory Group
• Thematic Working Paper Series
• Country Care Profiles
• Formal Care Indicators
• Practitioner Learning Video Series
• Child Protection in Post-2015 Framework
• New York Working Group
• 2019 UNGA Advocacy
• Care Leaders Council
• Moving Forward Handbook
• Tracking Progress Initiative
• Getting Care Right for All Children MOOC
• History and Rationale
• Reduce Orphanage Volunteering Campaign
• Tourism and Volunteering Sector Engagement
• Advocacy and Outputs
• Latest News
• Videos and Documentaries
• All Children Count But Not All Children Are Counted
• Children's Care Research Initiative
• The State of the Evidence Symposium
• Strengthening Global Data
• Country Care Snapshots
• Violence Against Children and Care
• Faith to Action Initiative
• Conference on Family Strengthening
• African Conference on Family-Based Care
• Wilton Park Conference
• Opportunities
• BCN Twitter
• BCN Facebook
• Country Care Reviews

Breadcrumbs Section. Click here to navigate to respective pages.

Adoption Instability, Adoption Breakdown

DOI link for Adoption Instability, Adoption Breakdown

Click here to navigate to parent product.

Most adoptions achieve the intended goal of stability and permanence, but there are cases where the connection between adopters and adoptees becomes unstable, at times ending in permanent breakdown. The aim of this chapter is to analyze different levels of adoption instability and different types of adoption breakdown. Research difficulties in the identification and analysis of cases of instability and breakdown are first analyzed. The incidence of instability and breakdown as reported in international research is then examined, although it is well known that the reported rates underestimate the magnitude of the problem. The chapter then provides a summary of the main findings regarding the causes of unstable adoptions. Research consistently indicates that, rather than being linked to a single cause, adoption instability and breakdown are the result of a critical accumulation of risk factors in three different domains: the child, the adopters and family life, and the support and services involved. The chapter ends with a reference to policy and practice implications derived from the existing knowledge on the topic.

• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions
• Cookie Policy
• Taylor & Francis Online
• Taylor & Francis Group
• Students/Researchers
• Librarians/Institutions

Connect with us

Registered in England & Wales No. 3099067 5 Howick Place | London | SW1P 1WG © 2024 Informa UK Limited

• DOI: 10.1177/1049731518783852
• Corpus ID: 150166469

Adoption Breakdown: Concept, Research, and Implications

• J. Palacios , Nancy Rolock , +1 author Maria Barbosa‐Ducharne
• Published in Research on social work… 26 June 2018
• Psychology, Sociology

71 Citations

Adoption breakdown research comes of age: introduction to the special section, factors associated with adoption breakdown following implementation of the fostering connections act: a systematic review, adoption breakdown in spain: a survival and age-related analysis, concept analysis of adoption: a hybrid model., why moral theories matter: a review of ethics and adoption literature, the hidden side of adoption in catalonia: when adoption breaks down, commentary: understanding research, policy, and practice issues in adoption instability, “we thought we were stronger than we were”: adopters’ narratives about the adoption journey and disruption, adoption workers’ perspectives on adoption adjustment and the honeymoon period, why and how do parents decide to adopt a study on motivations and the decision‐making process in becoming an adoptive family, 99 references, a scoping and scanning review of research on the adoption of children placed from public care.

• Highly Influential

Building Effective Post‐Adoption Services: What is the Empirical Foundation?*

Confronting barriers to adoption success, : in a rush to permanency: preventing adoption disruption, an investigation of family finding and matching in adoption : briefing paper, displays of parent suitability in adoption assessment reports, special-needs adoption, displacement or post-adoption placement a research note, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Find adoption answers, support, training, or professional resources

• Mission and Vision
• Staff and Board
• Internships
• Media & Press Room
• Job Openings for Adoption Professionals
• Social Work CE
• Training for Professionals
• Pre-Adoptive Parents
• Adoptive Parents
• Adopted Persons
• Birth Parents
• Expectant Parents
• School Supports and Resources
• Adoption Advocate Publication
• Adoption by the Numbers
• Profiles in Adoption
• Take Action
• Upcoming Events
• Adoption Hall of Fame
• National Adoption Conference
• Legacy Society
• Families For All Development Fund
• Family Formation Partners
• Annual Report

Predictors of Adoption Disruption and Dissolution: A Literature Review

Adoption advocate no. 169 - there is unanimous agreement in the scientific literature that the vast majority of all adoptions are successful. despite these encouraging statistics, it remains important for adoption social workers to be prepared to help support families who may struggle after adoptive placement. this article provides an overview of the existing empirical evidence pertaining to adoption disruption or dissolution and associated variables, highlighting factors related to the child, the adoptive parent(s), and the professional adoption services., lindsay lanham.

Unsuccessful adoptions are markedly complex. Child welfare scholars have attempted to guide and inform social work practice by isolating specific variables that may serve as “predictors” of adoption placement instability. This article provides an overview of the existing empirical evidence pertaining to adoption disruption or dissolution and associated variables. Mirroring most studies on this topic, this article highlights factors related to the child, the adoptive parent(s), and the professional adoption services.

Child-Related Factors

It is well documented in the literature that the child’s age at the time of adoption and the child’s behaviors in the adoptive home are the strongest predictors of adoption instability. In their now classic and heavily cited study on adoption, Barth et al. (1988) examine the outcomes of public adoption cases (n=926) in northern California from 1980-1984.

Disruption:

An adoption that is unsuccessful prior to an adoption being legally finalized.

Dissolution:

An adoption that is terminated after an adoption is legally finalized.

Children under the age of 3 were removed from the sample as were children placed out of state. Although not the first large-scale study on age and adoption outcomes in the U.S., this study is particularly noteworthy for its rigor and methodical approach. Findings show that as the age of the child increases so does the risk of an adoptive placement’s disruption.

Source: Barth et al. (1988), p. 230

Despite the myriad changes in child welfare practice and policy since the 1980s, these early findings have been consistently replicated in a number of rigorous studies over the past two decades for both domestic and intercountry adoptions [3] (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2012; Coakley & Berrick, 2008; Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, 2004; Julia, 2013; Palacios et al., 2005; Paniagua et al., 2019; Reilly & Platz, 2003; Sattler & Font, 2020).

Many theories have emerged (and were later empirically tested) to help explain why older children appear to be particularly vulnerable to adoption disruption or dissolution. Several scholars were quick to note that the child’s age at the time of adoptive placement may be a proxy for the amount of time a child has been in an out-of-home placement; however, studies do not confirm that the length of time in care is associated with adoption instability (Barth et al., 1988; Coakley & Berrick, 2008). Scholars increasingly agree that the age of the child at adoptive placement more accurately captures an accumulation of negative experiences that harm the child’s development and perception of the world, thereby increasing the likelihood that the child will experience mood instability and express challenging behaviors (Helder et al., 2014; Palacios et al., 2018). This theory does gain additional support from the Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) study completed by the Centers for Disease Control and Kaiser Permanente. In the ACEs study, researchers proved that as a child’s ACE score increases so does the likelihood that the child will experience less favorable health and well-being outcomes (Felitti et al., 1988).

Unsurprisingly, a child’s behaviors in the adoptive home are also reliable predictors of adoption placement instability. Children who exhibit aggression or children who sexually act out are at an increased risk of adoption disruption or dissolution. In a study using case data (n=74) from the Illinois child welfare system, Smith and Howard (1991) documented that children who exhibit sexually acting-out behaviors were 74% more likely to experience an unsuccessful adoption.   Selwyn et al. (2014) found that aggressive behaviors (particularly aggression perceived as violent) in the home significantly increase risks of adoption disruption and dissolution.

It is well documented in the literature that the child’s age at the time of adoption and the child’s behaviors in the adoptive home are the strongest predictors of adoption instability.

Placing a child with siblings yields mixed results, with some studies suggesting that sibling placements are more stable (Rolock & White, 2016) while others suggest just the opposite (Selwyn, 2018). In their comprehensive review of the literature, DiGiovanni and Font (2021) highlight that sibling placements are complicated, and outcomes are difficult to predict. In social work practice, these findings seem to make sense as social workers can attest to the fact that sometimes sibling groups thrive, while at other times sibling groups seem to increase stress and overall discord in the adoptive home.

Other child-related factors where there is no established association, a weak association, or mixed research findings include gender, race and ethnicity [4] , child’s intellectual ability, school performance, and medical diagnoses (Barth et al., 1988; Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, 2004; Palacios et al., 2018; Rosenthal, 1993; Sattler & Font, 2020).  

Adoptive Parent-Related Factors

Evidence of predictive factors relating to the adoptive parent or adoptive family are less conclusive. Demographic characteristics generally yield mixed results or generate weak associations, while measures of the parent-child relationship are better indicators of adoption success (Barbosa-Ducharne & Marinho, 2018).  

Adoption research studies that examine characteristics of the adoptive parent such as age, marital status, parenting experience [5] , income, and race and ethnicity yield mixed results across the literature. Interestingly, the adoptive mother’s educational attainment level emerges as an indicator of adoption placement instability, with higher educational levels associated with more disruptions or dissolutions when compared to mothers with more modest academic achievements (Barth et al., 1988; Coakley & Berrick, 2008). More contemporary research, however, complicates these findings suggesting that the adoptive mother’s education is actually a proxy for “heightened expectations” regarding the adopted child, and it is instead the adoptive parent’s expectations that are associated with adoption instability (Barth & Miller, 2000; Helder et al., 2014; Palacios et al., 2018).  

In their study of adopted children (n=609) from Nevada, Reilly and Platz (2003) measured adoptive parents’ expectations (of their child) along with other variables (e.g., child’s age). Parental expectations emerge as a significant indicator, with the greatest influence on adoption outcomes (Reilly & Platz, 2003, p. 799). Other studies have replicated these findings (Selwyn et al., 2015). Of particular interest for intercountry adoptions, researchers suggest that as adoptive parents wait for their adopted child to join their family, they “idealize” their child and the adoption experience thus leading to unmet or disjointed expectations (Lopes Almeida et al., 2021; Palacios et al., 2018). Adoptive parents who can readjust or better align their expectations are far more likely to experience positive adoption outcomes (Reilly & Platz, 2003).  

Measures of the parent-child relationship are better indicators of adoption success.

The parenting style of adoptive parents is also linked to adoption outcomes. Many studies have examined the impact of parenting styles on adoption outcomes (Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, 2004; Reilly & Platz, 2003).   In their recent publication Barbosa-Ducharne and Marinho (2019) examined all unsuccessful adoptions (n=117) in Portugal from 2006-2009. Their findings showed that parents with rigid parenting styles were five times more likely to experience adoption placement instability. The researchers, however, report that when a parent exhibiting a rigid parenting style is able to identify the specific challenges in the home, the probability of the placement breakdown reduces by three times (Barbosa-Ducharne & Marinho, 2019).  

Another important finding in the child welfare research is that adoptions are far more stable when the adoptive parent and adopted child have a relationship prior to the adoptive placement (Coakley & Berrick, 2008; Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, 2004; Palacios et al., 2018). Barth and Berry (1990) studied adoption disruptions and dissolutions in older child adoptions from California (n=1,115). In this study, 19% of the foster-adopt (or relative adopt) placements disrupted, while 39% of cases where there was no prior relationship between the adoptive parent and the adopted child disrupted. These findings have important implications for intercountry adoptions, where families rarely have opportunities to develop a significant relationship with the adopted child prior to placement.

Professional Adoption Services  

The impact of professional adoption services on adoption outcomes is also considered central to the discussion about adoption disruption or dissolution. Researchers have examined an array of variables such as adoption preparation, adoption training, post-adoption services, adoption timeliness, and public vs. private adoptions. While the results are interesting, the studies rarely produce results capable of being replicated. Components of the matching process and access to child file information appear to be stronger predictors for adoption placement stability than other aspects of professional adoption services.

The adoption matching process garners much attention in the literature. Child welfare researchers have suggested that when the adoptive match involves “stretching” or moving outside of the adoptive parent’s identified child parameters, the adoption is at an increased risk of disruption (Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, 2004; Selwyn et al., 2014). Although it is not uncommon for families to revisit their adoption parameters throughout the adoption process, research highlights the need for caution. As Palacios et al. (2018) point out, stretching may help place a child more quickly; however, it can create serious long-term challenges for a family as adoptive parents may not be fully or realistically equipped to successfully parent the child.

Components of the matching process and access to child file information appear to be stronger predictors for adoption placement stability than other aspects of professional adoption services.

Having access to the child’s complete and accurate history prior to the adoption is also associated with better adoption outcomes (Coakley & Berrick, 2008; Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, 2004). Many studies reported that lack of documentation or inaccuracy in the child file was associated with adoptive placement instability. Reilly and Platz (2003) found that 58% of adoptive parents participating in their study reported not receiving enough information on the child and 37% reported that information was inaccurate or minimized the seriousness of the child’s problems. Barbosa-Ducharne and Marinho (2019) found adoption instability was more likely to occur when the social worker and adoptive parents have less information about the adopted child.  

Implications for Adoption Practice

• The evidence suggests that if a problem in the adoptive home can be identified quickly and support is offered at the onset of the concern, adoption stability increases (Palacios et al., 2018). Monitoring and waiting to see if the child’s behavior persists does not align with the evidence for adoption stability. In a study of children adopted outside the U.S. between 1990-2005 (n=937), Paulsen and Merighi (2009) encourage social workers to identify high risk profiles and prepare families with ‘ready’ access to resources. Adoption social workers should offer interventions at the onset of an expressed concern — even if the family is still in their child’s birth country.
• Children with sexual abuse histories are particularly vulnerable to adoptive placement instability. Studies consistently show that adoptive parents often learn of sexual abuse history after the child is in the adoptive placement (Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, 2004). It is recommended that social workers universally prepare families for behaviors associated with sexual abuse trauma and the possible impact of sexual abuse. Adoptive families should have the language necessary to speak about child sexual abuse and know how to access supportive resources in their community, such as child advocacy centers, prior to placement.

Adoption social workers should offer interventions at the onset of an expressed concern.

• Adoption stability outcomes improve when the adoptive parents and the adopted child have a relationship prior to the adoptive placement (Coakley & Berrick, 2008; Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, 2004; Palacios et al., 2018). Although more research is needed, these findings suggest that participating in a hosting or fostering program prior to adoption may be beneficial to the overall outcome of an adoption. If it is not possible to foster, host, or even visit with the adoptive child prior to placement, it is recommended that prospective adoptive parents use every opportunity to create connections with their adopted child prior to the adoptive placement. If policies allow, social workers should encourage adoptive families to video-conference, send care packages and pictures, and write letters to the adopted child once they have accepted a referral.

Emphasize race and ethnicity trainings for adoptive families and include these conversations in the home study.

Although this paper discusses adoption disruptions and dissolutions, it is important for adoption social workers to remember that there is unanimous agreement in the scientific literature that the vast majority of all adoptions are successful (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2012). Likewise, once with their adoptive families, most adopted children thrive and make significant gains on a number of important indicators (Helder et al., 2014). Moreover, the majority of adoptive parents are satisfied with their adoption experiences and share that adoption had a positive impact on their families (Paulsen & Merighi, 2009). Despite these encouraging statistics, it remains important for adoption social workers to be prepared to help support families who may struggle after adoptive placement.

[1] Barth et al. (1998) use the term “adoption disruption” to refer to all adoption placement breakdowns regardless of the legal status (finalized or pending) of the adoption.

[2] The age category of 15-18 years is less stable for a variety of interesting reasons beyond the scope of this paper.

[3] This trend is also observed in guardianship placements. These findings are primarily for public domestic adoptions because private domestic adoption is usually infant adoption. We would rarely see disruptions/dissolutions for this age group. In fact, many studies examining adoption outcomes eliminate children under three.  

[4] It is important to note that when examining the span of adoption literature that includes all adoptions (private domestic adoptions, intercountry adoptions, foster care adoptions, and relative adoptions) findings pertaining to race and ethnicity are inconsistent. However, when you isolate for U.S. adoptions from foster care, findings highlight that African American children are more likely to experience adoption instability (Sattler & Font, 2020).

[5] Previous experience parenting a child diagnosed with a special need suggests improved adoption outcomes in some studies; however, single parents with no previous parenting experience tend to have successful adoptions despite the fact that they often adopt older children with more special needs.  

Barbosa-Ducharne, M., & Marinho, S. (2019). Beyond the child’s age at placement: Risk and protective factors in preadoption breakdown in Portugal. Research on Social Work Practice, 29 (2), 143-152.    

Barth, R. P., Berry, M., Yoshikami, R., Goodfield, R. K., & Carson, M. L. (1988). Predicting adoption disruption. Social Work, 33 (3), 227-233. Child Welfare.

Barth, R.P. & Berry, M. (1990). A Study of Disrupted Adoptive Placements of Adolescents. Child Welfare, 69 (3), 209-225.  

Barth, R. P., and Miller, J. M. (2000). Building effective post-adoption services: What is the empirical foundation? Family Relations, 49 (4), 447-455.

Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2012). Adoption disruption and dissolution. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Children’s Bureau. https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubPDFs/s_disrup.pdf

Coakley, J. F., & Berrick, J. D. (2008). In a rush to permanency: Preventing adoption disruption. Child & Family Social Work, 13 (1), 101–112.  

DiGiovanni, A., & Font, S. A. (2021). Revisiting conventional wisdom: What do we know from 30 years of research on sibling placement in foster care? Children and Youth Services Review, 126 , 105943.  

Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute. (2004). What’s working for children: A policy study of adoption stability and termination. New York, NY: Donaldson Adoption Institute. https://www.nationalcenteronadoptionandpermanency.net/post/what-s-working-for-children-a-policy-study-of-adoption-stability-and-termination .  

Felitti, V. J., Anda, R. F., Nordenberg, D., Williamson, D. F., Spitz, A. M., Edwards, V., Koss, M. P., & Marks, J. S. (1998). Relationship of childhood abuse and household dysfunction to many of the leading causes of death in adults: The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 14 (4), 245–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-3797(98)00017-8

George, R. M., Howard, E. C., Yu, D., & Radomsky, S. (1997). Adoption, disruption, and displacement in the child welfare system, 1976–1994. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago, Chapin Hall Center for Children.

Gunnar, M. R., VanDulmen, M. H., & International Adoption Project Team. (2007). Behavior problems in post-institutionalized internationally adopted children. Development and Psychopathology, 19 (1), 129–148.  

Helder, E. J., Mulder, E., & Gunnoe, M. L. (2014). A longitudinal investigation of children internationally adopted at school age. Child Neuropsychology, 22 (1), 1-26.

Julian, M. M. (2013). Age at adoption from institutional care as a window into the lasting effects of early experiences. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 16 (2), 101–145.  

Lopes Almeida, M., Souza Schwochow, M., & Bitencourt Frizzo, G. (2021). Associations between symptoms of common mental disorders, parental satisfaction and consideration for adoption breakdown in Brazilian adoptive parents. Children and Youth Services Review, 122 , 105910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105910

Palacios, J. (2019). Adoption breakdown research comes of age: Introduction to the special section. Research on Social Work Practice, 29 (2), 127-129. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731518783583

Palacios, J., Rolock, N., Selwyn, J., & Barbosa-Ducharne, M. (2018). Adoption breakdown: Concept, research and implications. Research on Social Work Practice, 29 (2), 130-142. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731518783852

Palacios, J., Sanchez-Sandoval, Y., & Leon, E. (2005). Intercountry adoption disruption in Spain. Adoption Quarterly, 9 (1), 35–55.  

Paniagua, C., Palacios, J., Jiménez-Morago, J. M., & Rivera, F. (2018). Adoption breakdown in Spain: A survival and age-related analysis. Research on Social Work Practice, 29 (2), 176-184. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731518791037

Paulsen, C., & Merighi, J. R. (2009). Adoption preparedness, cultural engagement, and parental satisfaction in intercountry adoption. Adoption Quarterly, 12 (1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926750902791540  

Rosenthal, J. A. (1993). Outcomes of adoption of children with special needs. The Future of Children, 3(1), 77–88. Reilly, T., & Platz, L. (2003). Characteristics and challenges of families who adopt children with special needs: An empirical study. Children and Youth Services Review, 25 (10), 781–803. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0190-7409(03)00079-3

Rolock, N., & White, K. R. (2016). Post-permanency discontinuity: A longitudinal examination of outcomes for foster youth after adoption or guardianship. Children and Youth Services Review, 70 , 419–427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.10.025

Sattler, K. M. P., & Font, S. A. (2020). Predictors of adoption and guardianship dissolution: The role of race, age, and gender among children in foster care. Child Maltreatment, 26 (2),216-227. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077559520952171

Selwyn, J. (2018). Sibling relationships in adoptive families that disrupted or were in crisis. Research on Social Work Practice, 29 (2), 165–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731518783859  

Selwyn, J., Wijedasa, D., Meakings, S., Great Britain. Department for Education, & University of Bristol School for Policy Studies, Hadley Centre for Adoption and Foster Care Studies. (2015). Beyond the adoption order: Challenges, interventions, and adoption disruption . Department for Education.

Smith, S. L., & Howard, J. A. (1991). A comparative study of successful and disrupted adoptions. Social Service Review, 65 (2), 248–265. https://doi.org/10.1086/603836

Originally published in 2022 by National Council For Adoption. Reprinting or republishing without express written permission is prohibited.

Related Resources

Exploring the Significance of Heritage Travel: A Journey Back, A Journey Forward

Adoption Advocate No. 179 - Heritage travel includes a diverse range of experiences that help adoptees connect with their cultural roots and ancestral origins. Travel can involve exploring familial he...

Understanding the Adoption Tax Credit

Improving Open Adoptions

Adoption Advocate No. 174 - This article covers what openness means in the context of adoption and how adoptive parents can, through openness, help adoptees integrate and heal. Lori Holden, adoptive p...

Exploring Medication for Adopted Children

Adoption Advocate No. 173 - As more adoptive parents seek healing for their children through mental health services, they are part of an overall rise in the general population of children and adolesce...

Start typing & press 'enter'

• EDI at PAC-UK
• PAC-UK Privacy Statement
• Publications
• Service User Case Studies
• Staff Profiles
• Our Services
• Adopted Adult Support (incl. Intermediary Services)
• Adoptive Parent & Carer Support
• Birth Parent & Relatives Support (incl. Intermediary Services)
• Child & Family Service (incl. Therapeutic Services)
• Child to Parent Violence Service
• Education Service
• Private Intermediary Service
• Commissioned Training
• Public Seminars
• Workshops for Adoptive Parents & Carers
• Workshops for Professionals
• Our Supporters
• Contact Leeds
• Contact London
• Press Office

Report reveals adoption breakdown rate and the experiences of adoptive families in crisis

The most comprehensive study ever to be carried out into adoption in England has confirmed that the rate of breakdown is lower than anticipated, but it also reveals a stark picture of the problems faced by families.

Researchers from the University of Bristol analysed national data on 37,335 adoptions over a 12 year period to show that 3.2 per cent of children – around three in 100 - move out of their adoptive home prematurely, known as a ‘disruption’.

Adoptions were more likely to breakdown if a child was placed once they were over the age of four. Most adoptions breakdown during the teenage years with teenagers 10 times more at risk of disruption compared with children under the age of four.

This is an important finding as services have focused on providing support in the early years of the placement. There are very few services for adopted young people and those parenting adopted teenagers.

Read more and download the report here .

Follow PAC-UK on Twitter Follow

Anyone at any time could become a kinship carer. Grandparents, aunts, uncles, brother, sisters, family friends, stepping in for children. Kinship families need recognition & support. How are you getting involved in Kinship Care Week? https://ow.ly/jaQo50SRknA #ThisIsKinshipCare

⌛️ We have a limited number of spaces left for #CPV #NVR Parent Group 39 - starts in September & eligible for funding via #ASGSF ✅ 10 weekly group sessions ✅ 1 follow-up group session ✅ 1 initial consultation meeting ✅ 1 review meeting and report ▶️ http://www.pac-uk.org/cpv

Monday, Tuesday & Friday 10.00am-4.00pm

Monday to Friday 9.00am-5.00pm

Thursday 12.00pm-2.00pm

Tel 0300 1800 205

Monday 3.00pm-6.00pm

Tuesday 11.00am-2.00pm

Thursday 1.00pm-4.00pm

Subscribe to our newsletter:

How to help PAC-UK:

• Privacy Overview
• Strictly Necessary Cookies
• 3rd Party Cookies

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

Read our Cookie Policy

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.

If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.

This website uses Google Analytics to collect anonymous information such as the number of visitors to the site, and the most popular pages.

Keeping this cookie enabled helps us to improve our website.

Please enable Strictly Necessary Cookies first so that we can save your preferences!