Seymour Crawford (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)

Adoption is an emotive issue and I appreciate the problems in it which other Members already have raised. Deputy Kathleen Lynch pointed out that two mothers are involved in the process. I recall how my next door neighbour lost her husband at an early age. She already had four children and was expecting another. Due to her changed economic circumstances, it was agreed the best outcome for the new child was for her to be adopted by a family member in America. My mother was very close to the lady in question and I well remember the trauma of the child being taken to the airport to be sent to America. Adoption, no matter what country the child comes from, is the result of a birth that a mother did not expect, want or could not maintain due to economic circumstances. I have many memories of that event. I listened to Deputy Ó Caoláin's explanation in regard to some of the other issues, of which none of us can be proud.

While I accept the Minister of State is making an effort in this area, the current situation is dangerous. The Bill is long promised legislation which is very necessary. As drafted, it does not provide for transitional arrangements, an issue that requires serious consideration. My party leader, Deputy Enda Kenny, raised this issue in the House this morning. I was glad to hear the Taoiseach state in his reply that we must find a way forward in this respect, an issue referred to today by speakers from all sides of the House.

I appreciate the Minister of State is dealing with difficult issues. However, we must also appreciate that many parents have gone through a long transition period to get to where they are. Many of them will have tried to have a child of their own and when this failed may have tried alternative means of having a child. When this also failed, they will then have realised the only way they could have a child was to go the adoption route. I would like to read into the record an e-mail I received from a person indirectly but closely involved in this House. The e-mail states:

We adopted our child in August 2004 and immediately applied to adopt a second child. The second assessment was very lengthy with a number of delays [another adjective is used here] that were out of our control. Eventually, in May 2008 [one can understand the reason a frustrated person might use a strong adjective] we received our declaration - which was another four years later - of suitability and eligibility to adopt and sent our papers to Russia in November 2008.

In October 2008, this lady spoke to an official in the Department and to the chairman of the Adoption Board and was advised to submit her paperwork to Russia, which she did, as there would be transitional measures to allow families like them to complete their adoptions. Two weeks ago, at the International Adoption Association annual conference, it was announced that the Bill as drafted provided for no transitional arrangements, leaving this couple in a difficult situation. They are hoping to travel to Russia in a few weeks to meet a child whom they hope to adopt. All going well, they will return to Russia some time in the New Year to go to court to complete the adoption. If the Bill, as drafted, is passed before the court hearing in Russia, they will not be able to complete the adoption.

These people, through all the legal technicalities and so on, have waited from 2004 following their first adoption to now to adopt a second child. With the flick of a pen, their efforts to provide a child with a loving new home could come to an end. I beg the Minister of State to rethink the situation and to ensure that transitional arrangements are provided for in the Bill.

A second case involves a couple who commenced on the road of adoption in 2005 through PAC. They were approved for adoption in March 2009 but did not receive their declaration until August 2009. They, too, are seeking to adopt from Russia and have been led to understand they could be called soon to go to Russia, that a child has been earmarked for them and that all going well they could bring that child home with them some time in January. These are two of many cases. The Minister of State's colleagues spoke of the e-mails they have received on this issue. It is absolutely essential that these people, who have gone through a great deal, in terms of soul searching and effort, to meet the criteria to allow them to adopt are not left in limbo.

A previous speaker stated there should be a right to switch, which is difficult. It would seem from the information we have been given that the main countries in which children have been available for adoption in recent times are Russia, Vietnam and China, although to a lesser extent. As has been already stated, adoptions in Vietnam are no longer possible owing to a lack of agreement in this area, leaving many families in limbo. I recall another young couple who were unable to have a child of their own and who went to a foreign country to adopt. The pleasure they have obtained through adoption of that child is extraordinary. The grandmother, family and community dote on the child who lives in a small village. The child is adored and has a great life. I know of two other adopted children in my parish who are involved at every level in the community, one of whom is playing Gaelic football at national level. There is ample proof that adopted children are well cared for.

I would like to raise a particular issue with the Minister of State. The young couple involved with PAC took part in training with a few other couples. Two couples involved in that training and who live nearer to Dublin city than they do have been able to adopt a baby from the national pool, which is obviously very limited. It seems, from comments made by their social worker and others, that the distance of their home from Dublin was part of the reason they were not successful in adopting a child here. I am not sure if the reason for this is that the parents of the adopted child requested that their child be brought up in an urban area. It is a little strange that of the small number of couples involved, two from a city area have been deemed suitable for adoption of children here while none of the couples from the rural areas has been successful. I grew up in a rural area and it is not a bad place to grow up.

My colleagues, Deputies Alan Shatter and Jim O'Keeffe, have played a major role in bringing this legislation before the House. Deputy Shatter spoke on the Bill this morning and Deputy O'Keeffe hopes to do so at length when it next comes before the House. Both Deputies have more experience than I in terms of the legalities and technicalities of legislation. However, they have made it clear to me they want clarity on the transitional situation we are in. I want the Minister of State to say tonight that he will seriously consider the issue of transitional arrangements and will do his best to move an amendment when he has the opportunity.

The records show that 4,000 foreign adoptions have been registered since 1991. There are now up to 400 families who are in limbo, waiting to see what will happen with this Bill. Officially, in 2007, a total of 377 foreign children were adopted by Irish families - 160 from Russia, 130 from Vietnam, 31 from China and various numbers from different countries. At present, 76 countries have ratified the Hague Convention; however, some of the countries with which we are particularly involved have not done so, and that is why it is essential to have transitional arrangements in place. There have been long discussions about information I understand the Minister has from reports that have not yet been made available. If this information were made available, it might help us understand some of the reasons for the delay in the area of transitional arrangements.

The Minister must now clarify to the 300 families wishing to adopt in Vietnam whether a bilateral agreement will be advanced prior to Vietnamese ratification of the Hague Convention. From the day of commencement of the Adoption Bill, it will not be possible to effect an adoption from such countries if a bilateral agreement is not in place. The Minister needs to relay the concerns and anguish of families approved for adoption in Vietnam and establish whether transitional arrangements will be put in place for these families prior to the enactment of the Bill. In the case of Vietnam, 20 families are on that road; I am not sure of the corresponding number for Russia. The numbers are not large, but to those families it is critical.

The Minister must publicly disclose the issues that must be addressed with regard to Vietnam adoptions. What is the status of the transitional bilateral agreements with Ethiopia and Russia? The Russian authorities have established bilateral agreements with other countries, which shows there is a precedent and intent on the Russian side. Considering this, will the Minister outline the course of action the authorities plan to take? The Minister must be clear about whether the Irish authorities intend to pursue the established bilateral agreements with Russia and, if so, what action is being taken?

There have been long discussions about the grandfather clause and other such things. I heard one of the Minister's Green Party colleagues talking about this earlier. If a family has already adopted a child from a certain country and another chid from the same family or background becomes available, it is important that the door is left open for them to adopt the second chid. This would help the structure of their own family and help the child that is already there. That is extremely important. I understand such a grandfather clause was recommended by the Law Reform Commission but is not included in the Bill. As the legislation stands, families that have adopted a child from a country that falls outside the restrictions are prevented from adopting a second child from that country. Intercountry adoption aims to build families with more than one child from the same country or origin, with similar backgrounds and experiences, and it is important that this be facilitated.

The issue of post-adoption services is equally important. It is a different family structure. The child comes from a background with different smells, feeding structures and so on. We need to be careful that there is proper follow-up after adoption and that the parents and child have the best possible advice and opportunities available to them. It is important that adopted children can learn to understand and cope with what is happening around them. This is why a follow-up structure is important. Birth relatives and adopted people often feel the need to talk about their experiences. Post-adoption services can offer a chance to meet others in the same situation through a groupwork service, and it is also important to have individual support, especially to birth mothers and adopted people who are considering contact with birth relatives.

Often in the past, when there were more adoptions than there are now, it was interesting to note that couples would adopt a child - or two, for that matter - and subsequently give birth to their own children after trying unsuccessfully for many years. There are all sorts of situations to take into account. However, I cannot over-emphasise the issue of transition. Normally, a mother, along with her partner or husband, has nine months to prepare for a child. However, when a adoption takes place, the process may take four or five years. The expectation is extraordinary. I sat in my home only three weeks ago last Saturday with a young couple who had tried in every way to have a family. They are now waiting to hold their child in their arms for the first time and know it is theirs. If the Minister and his advisers do the wrong thing here, that couple and many others will not be able to reach the goal they have so long sought. I urge the Minister to do what the Taoiseach said on another occasion, namely, find a way to deal with the situation and deal with it now.

See this speech in context