The Effect Of Adoption On The Bamber Family

[G-Unit]

Does it not seem strange that Canon Jay would recommend, as a prospective parent, someone he'd known during the war some 12 years earlier? What seems more likely is that a relative, being vicar in residence very close to where the Bambers lived, was more than aware of their desire to adopt, and when Christine became pregnant was able to manipulate the situation in their favour.

Who was his relative?

[APRIL]

Who was his relative?

His brother, Peter Jay.

[Holly Goodhead]

His brother, Peter Jay.

A Peter Jay was Eric Jay's son and a poet.  Did EJ have a brother PJ who was a local vicar?

[APRIL]

A Peter Jay was Eric Jay's son and a poet.  Did EJ have a brother PJ who was a local vicar?

Peter Jay was vicar at St Luke's in Tiptree. I believe he corresponded with Sheila, possibly around the time Sheila and Christine met? I understood him to be Sheila's uncle.

[Holly Goodhead]

Peter Jay was vicar at St Luke's in Tiptree. I believe he corresponded with Sheila, possibly around the time Sheila and Christine met? I understood him to be Sheila's uncle.

If he was Sheila's uncle then he was Christine's brother not Eric's son.  I haven't heard of him having a formal role in the church.  Afaik he was/is an Oxford educated poet who run his own publishing firm.

[G-Unit]

Peter Jay was vicar at St Luke's in Tiptree. I believe he corresponded with Sheila, possibly around the time Sheila and Christine met? I understood him to be Sheila's uncle.

I know her natural mother had a brother Peter, but he wasn't a vicar when Sheila was born and adopted he was living with his parents, I think. He learned of the birth and adoption from his mother in 1978 I believe. 

[APRIL]

If he was Sheila's uncle then he was Christine's brother not Eric's son.  I haven't heard of him having a formal role in the church.  Afaik he was/is an Oxford educated poet who run his own publishing firm.

 My information is that this person was vicar of St Luke's in Tiptree and that letters from him were found amongst Sheila's effects. Might he have been Sheila's mother's brother? In which case his name wouldn't have been Jay. It raises questions, such as how would the Bambers have felt about having one of her biological relatives living so close? How might they have felt about them corresponding? Next time I'm in Tiptree, I'll go into St Lukes. It may have a list of previous vicars.

[Caroline]

If he was Sheila's uncle then he was Christine's brother not Eric's son.  I haven't heard of him having a formal role in the church.  Afaik he was/is an Oxford educated poet who run his own publishing firm.

Eric was father to both Christine and Peter. Peter was a publisher, at least that is what it stated on one of his statements. I think he was the founder of Anvil Press - they do (or did) publish poetry.

[G-Unit]

There's very little information about how people were screened and accepted as adopters. Obviously religion was an important consideration because most adoptions were organised by religious organisations. In the years up to the 1970s the unmarried mother was seen as a sinner, a fallen woman. It was important to make sure that her child was brought up in a household where it would learn right from wrong, which meant a religious household.

There were circumstances where a baby might be rejected for adoption. These included disabled and mixed race children and those whose mothers had mental health issues. Only 'perfect' children were elligible.

It's not possible to discover what criteria (apart from religion) were used to choose parents for these children. There were medicals and references were sought, I believe, but how much weight was given to them isn't known. I was adopted by a man with serious heart problems, but I don't know if that could be diagnosed easily in the 1940's. All I know is he only lasted two years after the adoption. The Bamber children were given to a woman with mental problems but we don't know why.

[Holly Goodhead]

There's very little information about how people were screened and accepted as adopters. Obviously religion was an important consideration because most adoptions were organised by religious organisations. In the years up to the 1970s the unmarried mother was seen as a sinner, a fallen woman. It was important to make sure that her child was brought up in a household where it would learn right from wrong, which meant a religious household.

There were circumstances where a baby might be rejected for adoption. These included disabled and mixed race children and those whose mothers had mental health issues. Only 'perfect' children were elligible.

It's not possible to discover what criteria (apart from religion) were used to choose parents for these children. There were medicals and references were sought, I believe, but how much weight was given to them isn't known. I was adopted by a man with serious heart problems, but I don't know if that could be diagnosed easily in the 1940's. All I know is he only lasted two years after the adoption. The Bamber children were given to a woman with mental problems but we don't know why.

My adoption was arranged by the East Anglian Adoption Society in Cambridge.  I don't think it was affiliated with any religion or church.

My birth mother said she had no interest in religion and the adopters could be Buddhist for all she cared!  My adoptive father has always been an atheist and my adoptive mother agnostic.

My file shows various questions asked of my birth mother eg family history of physical and mental health and alcoholism. There's also a letter from her GP and various references but Interestingly now you've mentioned it there wasn't anything for my adoptive parents.

There seemed to be a lot of emphasis on 'matching' by way of physical appearance: height, weight, hair and eye colour. I've always thought the way these adoptions were arranged as on par with Nazism!  Luckily I was described as a fine child but what if I had been unfine?  I wonder what happened to any of the Thalomide babies put up for adoption? 

I once had a boyfriend who was adopted and his adoptive father died in a car accident when he was 2 yoa.

[APRIL]

My adoption was arranged by the East Anglian Adoption Society in Cambridge.  I don't think it was affiliated with any religion or church.

My birth mother said she had no interest in religion and the adopters could be Buddhist for all she cared!  My adoptive father has always been an atheist and my adoptive mother agnostic.

My file shows various questions asked of my birth mother eg family history of physical and mental health and alcoholism. There's also a letter from her GP and various references but Interestingly now you've mentioned it there wasn't anything for my adoptive parents.

There seemed to be a lot of emphasis on 'matching' by way of physical appearance: height, weight, hair and eye colour. I've always thought the way these adoptions were arranged as on par with Nazism!  Luckily I was described as a fine child but what if I had been unfine?  I wonder what happened to any of the Thalomide babies put up for adoption? 

I once had a boyfriend who was adopted and his adoptive father died in a car accident when he was 2 yoa.

Mine was arranged by the, now defunct, National Adoption Society. It had no religious affiliation. My file carries the same background questionnaire as, I imagine, does your own. I was also subjected to the same medical overhaul as were all other babies, or perhaps it was only those who were going to be adopted who were required to be clear of STD's? There was no letter from a family doctor, but there were other letters of character reference.

The woman who adopted me used a tubercular shoulder as a reason for adopting. Whilst it may not be seen as sufficient reason now, it was at a time when there were more babies to adopt than there were homes for them to be placed in. Certainly there were many, MANY women who were allowed to adopt who should NEVER have had children.

[G-Unit]

My adoption seems to have been organised by the Local Authority. I wasn't able to find any files.

[APRIL]

My adoption seems to have been organised by the Local Authority. I wasn't able to find any files.

As the National Adoption Society (office  Baker Street, London) had ceased to function, my files were held by Brentford Council. You need to approach which ever Council was responsible for arranging your adoption and they will arrange for a social worker to handle the case. I feel sure your files can be located. It's your legal right to know what's in them.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Crikey!  Does being adopted give you more of an interest in this case than if you weren’t adopted?  Every adopted male person I have ever known (at least 4 of them) were gay.  I wonder if that’s coincidental or not...

[G-Unit]

As the National Adoption Society (office  Baker Street, London) had ceased to function, my files were held by Brentford Council. You need to approach which ever Council was responsible for arranging your adoption and they will arrange for a social worker to handle the case. I feel sure your files can be located. It's your legal right to know what's in them.

I did it all by the book; social worker, counselling etc. I was told they couldn't find them. My birth mother wasn't a young single girl, she was a married woman with two daughters. Her husband only agreed to reunite if I went, which is why I was two years old when adopted.