There are no current loophole but we could change laws to create one in regards to reversing adoptions.

In the United Kingdom, there currently isn’t any legal avenue to reverse legal adoptions which haven’t been fair but done to the correct legalities of the children’s act, adoption act etc. We have started the process of taking ourselves out of the European Union. This means that the European convention of human rights doesn’t have to apply here anymore. I know a lot of you may think that this is not a positive thing. However, the clauses that currently get used wrongly against vulnerable adults will no longer have to be applied. We could replace it with our own human rights act which could be completely reworded so that it cannot be abused by bullying authorities. Then create a separate act that no longer is bound to be compatible with the European rights convention. This would make an application to a court, first magistrates or county, crown court, court of appeal. The decision of any court will be allowed to be appealed up to the Supreme Court if it is about a point of law. This act would effectively allow an adoption to be reversed if certain criteria is met. It also would allow birth parents to obtain an order which will be presented to adoptive parents to enforce letterbox contact if there hasn’t been one made at an adoption hearing.

The fact that we are soon no longer a part of the EU legally opens up our legal system to become fairer on those that get treated badly due to the clauses of the convention. We scrap a load of laws that were made while we were members of the EU and subsequently replace them with our own that legally no longer has to be compatible with the human rights act legislation. The clause currently causing a lot of unfairness is relating to protection of national security (terrorism means that we cannot change that part), public safety, economy, health/morals, prevent disorder/crime,  and protection of the rights and freedoms of others. The European of human rights point out that the threats to the above areas should be ‘proportional’. This issue of forced adoption in the U.K. was debated in the European court of human rights. I was sent the link to the video and even those in the EU were horrified at how disproportionate our countries actions were in regards to these cases. This must mean that isn’t how Europe countries interpret the clauses above.

The new legislation has to be written in such a way to ensure that those with some invisible disabilities aren’t subject to discrimination or unfair treatment. At the moment, the way that various relevant acts used within family court proceedings, only alcoholics and drug addicts seem to not lose their children to adoption. I have seen this happen repeatedly. The parents ‘ability to change’ should not be stacked against those with conditions such as forms of autism and mental illness. Addiction is a habit that can be full stopped, mostly after a few attempts to quit substances. Mental health doesn’t go away completely and autism certainly is long term. Long term services have been deemed too expensive by council funding departments. This leaves vulnerable people just existing rather than truly living a full life like those without conditions. Those of us deemed to need life long services are losing our children to adoption on a daily basis.