Grandparents of children given to gay couple for adoption are denied access for three years

• The couple were allegedly deemed 'too old' by City of Edinburgh Council social workers to care for their two grandchildren themselves
• Claim they were promised they would still have contact with their grandchildren after they were adopted
• Grandparents, aged 64 and 49, now haven't seen the children in three years
• Scottish Government unveiled plans on Tuesday for grandparents to get sweeping new legal rights to bring up their grandchildren

Heartbroken: The children's mother, centre, pictured with their grandparents who were told they couldn't adopt the children by Edinburgh social workers

The grandparents of two children given to a gay couple for adoption have been denied access to them for three years.
The Scottish Daily Mail first revealed their appalling ordeal in 2009, when the case sparked a storm of protest across the UK.
They claimed they had been barred from looking after the youngsters because they were deemed ‘too old’ to care for them, although the council refutes this.
The couple, who raised seven children of their own and cared for their eldest daughter’s children until the boy was five and his sister was four, claim promises of contact were broken.
The 64-year-old grandfather has since suffered a stroke – and now fears he may die without seeing them again.
City of Edinburgh Council social worker Heather Rush told the grandparents around the time of the adoption that they would not be allowed to see the children if they did not give their blessing to the controversial move.
The grandparents from Perthshire – who cannot be identified for legal reasons – spoke of their on-going torment last night, after the Scottish Government unveiled plans on Tuesday for grandparents to get sweeping new legal rights to bring up their grandchildren.
The grandfather said: ‘Those children were everything to me. They were rays of sunshine in the life of my family and when they were taken away we felt we’d lost everything.
‘People always think that sorrow fades with time but I can promise you it doesn’t. I still go upstairs at night to find my wife in tears and I’m not much better.
‘It’s affected my health badly. Four weeks ago I had a stroke and I am in no doubt that the stress of our lives being torn apart was behind it.’
The couple were aged 61 and 46 when the children were removed by social workers in Edinburgh, where they lived.
At the time, they say they were told they were considered ‘too old’ to be parents to the children of their heroin addict daughter, even though the children were happy with them and they had cared for them almost since birth.

Apology: City of Edinburgh Council bosses admitted mistakes were made in the in the way the grandparents were dealt with in this case

Although the grandfather was approaching retirement age, he was fit and well and still doing heavy manual work as a farmhand.
His 49-year-old wife said last night: ‘We are glad to hear the Scottish Government has listened to what we believe the majority of the public wants and is recognising the rights and the vital role of grandparents.
‘We’d like it to make a difference to our situation but it’s too late for that now. Our grandson turned nine in July and his little sister will be eight in December, and obviously we hope and pray they are well and settled.
‘We wouldn’t disrupt them again even if the law gave us the right to do it as it wouldn’t be in their interests, but we would hope any new legislation would enshrine our rights to reasonable contact with them.

The children, a boy and a girl, were looked after by their grandparents before being adopted aged five and four (stock image)

‘We were told when they were taken away that the couple adopting them would be happy to let us have contact.
‘After speaking to the Mail to raise awareness of our loss, we were effectively “punished” and told trust had been breached and it would be a year before the couple would consider whether we could be trusted.
‘But three years have gone by now and nothing has changed. We were more than grandparents to them. Because our daughter couldn’t cope, we were mother and father to them as well.
‘They loved us and we adored them, and it’s a sin that the state can break the natural love and bond that a family shares.’
She added: ‘My husband is 64 now and has had a pretty serious stroke. He requires an angioplasty  operation and could have another stroke at any time.
‘I pray he’ll be well for years to come, but the children being snatched from us has caused this, and it would be unforgivable if his health should fail again – for him to be forced to die still yearning for his grandchildren.
‘We can only send a card at Christmas and birthdays, through the social work department. We get no acknowledgement.
‘We know the children still love us and care for us because we got a note at Christmas saying they had asked us to let them know what things they liked as very young children, when they cut their first teeth, and asking us for photos of ourselves.
‘We were delighted to provide all we were asked for and hoped it might lead to contact, even once a month, but there’s been nothing. It’s not right.’

Paving the way for change: Scottish Parliament announced plans this week for grandparents to have new legal rights to bring up their grandchildren

In May 2009, Edinburgh council bosses admitted that mistakes were made in the way they dealt with the grandparents and apologised after two highly disturbing phone calls between the couple and social worker Mrs Rush.
In the first, she told them they would not be allowed to see the children if they did not give their blessing to the controversial gay adoption.
In the second, which came the day the grandparents went public with their story, Mrs Rush allegedly told the children’s mother her parents would never see them again.
A council spokesman said: ‘Decisions about contact are based only on the well-being and best interests of the children. In this case it was made very clear to the family at the time of the adoption placement that there would be no direct contact.’