Archived Forums

not something I had thought of before.But my children moved within urban areas so maybe not an issue for them.As for myself I was born and brought up in urban areas but ideally would live in a rural area, but practically for us it would not work.So will remain just a dream.On a practical note it might not be able to place a child into a similar environment as I would have thought population wise there would be less available placements in rural areas. But one to ponder.

as with so many other things depends on the child. Simba lived in a lane with 3 houses, a couple of miles from a village and about 20-30 minutes drive to large county town, so immediate environment very rural.He apparently expressed a wish to live in a town or city because the the village was boring. As regards regular activities he went to cubs and swimming once a week and occasionally to the theatre, eg Christmas panto. Here is the city he was everthing on the doorstep. We can go swimming three times a week, he goes to two clubs, things at the gym, frequently to theatre and pictures because its no great expedition and he can be still be in bed at a reasonable hour. But we have big parks and easy access to rural stuff. So he gets access to the opportunites a city offers and some green stuff. As he gets older I think being in the city will bring greater benefits for support at school, college, supported work etc. Suppose it partly depends on how much of a taxi driver you want to be as welllike amh I grew up in big cities but hanker after a more rural idlyl which I probably will never get.

I live as rural as it gets, neighbours 3 kilometers away, shop 10, school 29. I have lived in big cities as well, even a year in hackney and archway! Yes it is a bigger hassle to go to activities, but than I pressume when we go it's extra special. My children have both 2 music lessons every week, swimming is for the summer outside, and in the winter we have specific local activities as well.I think it is easier to raise complicated children in quiet environments where there are plenty of usefull tasks to do and life is very predictable. Even the seasons bring different tasks, and activities.And when they are teenagers the fact that they can not just run out and be 'on the street', might come in very handy I have a little cottage and rent this out, for the people who come their holiday is my daily life, lol.

For me, and my sensory defensive child, nothing better than living in a rural area. Peace, quiet (except for the odd sheep and cow noises). He loves it.I'm London born, could not imagine going back.My dad, also London born and raised, has ended up a few miles from the small village he was evacuated to during the war. He couldn't wait to get back. So I guess it depends on the individual.

I think it is very much an issue that is overlooked when placing...and it could be that it does have a bigger impact than we might imagine.Just the simple geographical differences between counties could be very significant to a child...moving from a very flat area to one filled with steep valleys and hills...not to mention the cultural difference, which I believe is still alive and well, North and South definitely, but also pockets of 'locals' within towns and larger villages who have a cultural code specific to them.But rural to large city...yes...that is a biggy, or vice versa The pace of life, the different safety issues, amount of people milling around etc, etc...not saying one is worse or better than the other...just that am sure children notice and are affected by massive changes in their external environment.The thing about teens....well...they moan about everything anyway and may think they prefer the bright lights and 'stuff' to do...but then Steps son is yearning for the quiet life he imagines suits him better..so...you know...grass is always greener possibly for teens.I do appreciate though that he may have a deep, subconscious yearning for his county of birth.Which is the best environment?horses for courses.....and at the end of the day,parents HAVE to live where they live most of the time for economic reasons. We are no longer able to be as mobile as Mrs Thatcher thought we should be...our bikes all got taken to cash converters

I've wondered this myself in terms of where is best to grow up if you have special needs.However, my DS freaks if we visit a local small town or even a busier village nearby. He can't cope with the noise of the cars much less anything else.I used to live London & am very aware his life would've been incredibly stressful if he had been placed there.So, birdsong & not much else is what we can hear right now. So that's good at this stage in our life.

Great question We live in semi rural villages in the southThe placing team come from inner city in a large northern city They thought they were getting a lot of privilege for the children but actually its caused a lot of troublesFor a start, there's a lot of hidden deprivation in the villages round here, especially in families like ours who all try and stay within striking distance of our original villagesFurther the services here haven't got as much resource for struggling families as they do in the major city they came from so access to support is very much restrictedThe major city think the south county is awash with cashThey have no understanding that the children's troubles would lead them right back into the system of services and how much poorer the services are hereThat being saidBoth our ac absolutely love outdoorsTreesCountrysideCreatures bugs and birdsThere is very little of this in their original cityReally the benefit of semi rural villages is that there's a set of amenities locally like chemist doctors co-op and a post office Several good bus stops train links and literally 10 mins into a large town with pool cinema etcThink the education opportunities are better in some waysLots of extra curricular sports and arts things going onThe large village school takes everyone from the farm workers children to the land owners child and the kids off the estates plus the commuters children So a broad mix that has good standardsButAnd it's a biggyWhen it comes to SEN and specialist provision you are extremely limited especially of it your girl with complex needsYou have literally 3 schools serving the whole countyThe rest are private There is hopeless provision The placing la wildly overestimated the improved outcome for children like mineThey didnt bank on them becoming southern kids eitherWith southern friendsA locally based set of interestsAnd southern accentsThey viewed this as snobbyAnd wrong! The children have done ok here I thinkThey are amazing survivors and do get through

We are suburban within a rural area and son came from similar though 3 hours away - placed within the consortium though. Similarity of geographical environment was seen as a plus by social workers.Likewise, whilst I was waiting for son, I was provisionally linked to another child, who was from inner city London. This was seen as problematic, though not a deal breaker. In that case, the big concern was that the nearest appropriate (special) school would have been 20 miles away, which was felt to be too far for a 4 year old. I tend to agree that it wasn't ideal.I like suburban. Son can do clubs and so on within walking distance, but he is known around the place. I know that could backfire heavily, but right now it's a small enough environment for him to feel safe and large enough for him to be stimulated and have a semi-independent social life (age appropriate of course).

Not sure about this one as I don't feel the vast majority of us get a choice in where we live due to work/finances/family etc. I think if you are adopting a very young child it won't make much difference where you live, as they will adapt and it will be the norm for them, but I do think if the child is older they should be able to have a say to a degree in whether they go to adopters who live in a city or adopters who live in the countryside, that is of course if there is a choice of adopters which of course is rare. I know of a couple who adopted two older boys of 8 & 10. The couple were very well to do, privately educated, upper middle class people who lived in a very well to do area of Surrey. The boys were from a deprived background, council estate, up north. When the boys came to live with them they couldn't cope with the change of environment. The boys had very strong northern accents and struggled to be accepted in their local school as the kids made fun of their accents. Eldest boys behaviours were so difficult (don't want to go into detail) but the placement disrupted after 6 months due to his violence within the home. The boys went back into care and the couple were so affected by the disruption they remain childless to this day. In this case I really felt this was not a good match and the differences were way too wide for older children to cope with. With the best will in the world it was never going to work and I feel the boys should have had a say in the placement, but unfortunately as they were older they didn't. SS were just delighted to find a placement for them even if it was the wrong one.

Interesting topic ....I guess it depends on the child. My experience is that it's not good for a child to look or be too "different" in a rural setting- as they will be picked on , due to colour , culture, accent etc.I have a few friends who have moved from the city to the country and been surprised at how long it's taken for them to be accepted , as they were very much seen as outsiders Elma.( in the city)

I think being picked on is more complicated than being different. My youngest has not even started school and already being bullied in peer groups. Children just do not like him, and that has not a lot to do with the fact that his hair is black, that he's adopted or any other 'outside' thing. It has to do with the fact that other children precieve him as unreliable, he does not 'mirror' right. If he was a mentally healthy child, he would be confident, he would 'speak the same non verbal language'. Unfortunally this is not the case.