From the Times Online (UK). It appears that this article focuses more on the children adopted from the foster care system. I wonder how many (if any) of these children are internationally adopted. Also, I would be interested to know if by "return to care" they are referring to those children whose adoptions were finalized or not. In the US, being "returned to care" would likely refer to only children adopted from foster care since children adopted internationally who end up in the system are considered "new" cases (since they were formerly part of another country's child welfare system). Semantics sometimes makes it difficult to get the full story.
Additionally, I found this story only reinforced a lot of negative stereotypes about children who have been in the foster care system, as well as the typical view that children are "left to suffer at
the hands of dysfunctional natural parents." Whether this means straight out physical or sexual abuse or whether it might be poverty-driven neglect (which is very, very common) I don't know – but it does very much make a difference – for me.
Number of adopted children returned to care has doubled in five years
The number of adopted children who have been returned to care homes because
their new parents cannot cope with them has doubled in the past five years.
Data obtained under the Freedom of Information Act show that the number has
increased by a third in the past year alone as parents struggle with often
challenging children who have suffered years of neglect or abuse in their
natural families.
Going back into care after living with an adoptive family is a traumatic
experience for children, and for the adoptive parents who have to accept
their only chance of having a family has gone. It is also a huge cost to an
already over-stretched system with the children likely to need expensive
specialist care.
The increase in breakdowns comes despite a fall in the number of children
being adopted. Only 4,637 children were adopted in 2007, the lowest number
since 1999.
Read the whole article here.
Harlow's Monkey 
From my own experience, I have tended to think that no matter what, the interrupted childhood results in one being stuck betwixt and between.
I went from an insane, nearly feral situation (mental illness + poverty) to a cold but adequate one (foster homes) then on to an abusive unsupportive one (one bio parent, abusive step parent, too many children – 9).
In the end the only solutions were those I took onto myself as a young adult.
But that article is just confusing. Judgmental or something?