Nationally we are more than 8,000 foster carers short, meaning that many children who would be best served by living in a family environment are being denied the opportunity to experience 'normal' family life. The Fostering Network recently surveyed local authorities in England, Scotland and Wales, and its figures suggest that 66 per cent of responding authorities are paying at or below the Fostering Network's minimum recommended weekly allowances. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to guess who is making up the shortfall - the foster carers!
As a professional foster carer, I take Ms Seabrook's comments about standards of care personally. I can put my hand on my heart, look her in the eye and tell her that my looked-after child has had the best standard of love, care and attention it has been possible for my family and me to provide. In all probability, it has at times been better than that received by my own three children during whose formative years I worked full-time.
As for advocacy for looked-after children, I have yet to meet a foster carer who has not advocated vocally and forcefully for their looked-after child at every opportunity. Unfortunately many foster carers find that they are often heard but rarely listened to.
Adoption should not be viewed as a universal panacea. Some older children are not adoption material and they are best served by staying in a care system with a holistic and multi-disciplinary approach to helping damaged children come to terms with their earlier experiences. There are other children who don't want to be adopted, as they know they have their own birth families who they love but are unable to live with, so they may not want to belong to someone else's family.
I think Ms Seabrook may be a little out of touch with fostering, so I extend an open invitation to her to meet foster carers in Stockport. I don't think it would be hard to change her views.
Caroline Rushmer, Cheadle Hulme, Cheshire
