The state funded British Association for Fostering and Adoption, usually sticklers for Political Correctness, has used the term "retarded" to describe opponents of gay adoption, according to a report in the Daily Mail.
Since 2002 unmarried couples, including gay couples, have been allowed to adopt. I think children will usually be better off placed with them than left in care. But preference should be given to a married couple wishing to adopt even though it would be reasonable to conclude such a placement would be in the best interests of the child. The law is supposed to ensure the interests of the child are paramount but there are an array of politically correct rules which mean this is overridden in practice.
The Daily Mail say the number of children placed for adoption has actually fallen since 2002 from 3,800 a year to 3,200 a year. Last year there were just 30 adoptions by male gay couples and 50 by lesbian couples.
I'm on the Adoption Panel for my Council and it does seme to me that BAAF are part of the problem rather than part of the solution when it comes to the challenge of getting children out of care and placed for adoption. I think all Councils use BAAF as they seem to have some sort of monopoly. What is needed is an alternative body providing guidelines for social workers and othes on the various practical and legal issues. One seeking to overcome the barriers to adoption, not add to them with their own politically correct spin.