Post-Adoption Contact With Birth Parent: Not If Adopters Oppose

Naomi Angell

Post-Adoption Contact With Birth Parent

It is not uncommon for a birth parent to seek direct contact with an adopted child – but in what circumstances might the court allow this to happen? Until recently, contact between birth parents and adopted children was not recommended, but the tide could be turning in favour of more openness – if safe to do so.

The specialist adoption solicitors at Osbornes Law are experienced in supporting birth parents and adoptive parents, including issues relating to direct and indirect contact post-adoption.

A recent ruling, in which the judge severely criticised the local authority for its inaction, is helpful in illustrating the current challenges for a birth parent seeking direct contact.

Impact of adoption

Judges make adoption orders only if there is no other realistic option that will protect the welfare of the child. In other words, adoption is a last resort with significant consequences for all the parties: the birth parents lose all parental responsibility for the child – and the adoptive parent/s acquire parental responsibility.

The order is unique for its finality and only in rare cases will an adoption order be revoked.

However, a birth parent may be able to apply for permission to seek direct contact post-adoption under the Adoption Act 2002 s51A. The Act sets out the relevant factors to be taken into account, including any risk of harm of any disruption to the child’s life and any representations made by the child or adoptive parents to the court.

What happened in this case?

The birth mother (BM) wanted direct contact once or twice a year with a 4-year-old girl, who had been adopted in early 2024 without her consent.

At a hearing in the month following the making of the adoption order, the court was handed a report from CAMHS which opposed direct contact. Given that BM and the adoptive mother (AM) had agreed to meet, the post-adoption contact application was adjourned to allow CAMHS to do further work with the little girl.

By the time of the final hearing, AM was not opposed to direct contact in principle but felt that now was not the time for it to start.

The judge noted the long-standing principle that a court should not order post-adoption contact with the birth family against the adopters’ wishes, except in “exceptional circumstances”. By the time s51(A) was inserted in 2014, there had been a move towards more openness in post-adoption contact – but not in cases where the adopters opposed contact.

The judge also noted a report published last November from the Public Law Working Group’s adoption sub-committee. The committee recommended that “there needs to be a greater focus on the issue of contact with the birth family as long as it is safe.” The committee went further, calling for a “sea change” in approach to the issue.

No direct contact

It was the judge’s view in this case that to grant BM’s application would cause an almost guaranteed risk of harm to the child. She would, for example, be destabilised and emotionally derailed and the relationship between her and AM could be jeopardised.

There was also the need for the child to enjoy stability in her placement and to continue her work with CAMHS. A crucial factor was AM’s opposition to immediate direct contact. The judge considered that future direct contact may be possible but, for now, indirect contact and life story work would be sufficient.

Local authorities vital in adoption cases

While the work of a local authority in adoption cases is vital, the judge heavily criticised the London Borough of Southwark which he said had let down the child as well as AM and BM.

There had been an “unacceptable” absence of any proper progress on the life story work which had (among other problems) delayed any opportunity for the time to arrive when direct contact between BM and the child could be seriously considered.

Such was the judge’s concern that he felt the local authority had simply “walked away from the issue of contact”. He directed the local authority to finalise its life story work by the end of January 2025.

How we can help

While there could eventually be a greater willingness to allow direct contact post-adoption, this case illustrates the difficulties in securing it in practice – particularly if the adoptive parents oppose contact. The child’s welfare needs, both in the short and long term, will be court’s paramount consideration.

To speak to an adoption lawyer, Naomi Angell, or a member of her team please:

• Call us on 020 7485 8811, or
•  Fill in the online form below.