Clare Daly (Dublin North, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 3: To ask the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, further to Parliamentary Question No. 104 of 14 February 2012, which did not include measures to ensure that adopted persons' identities have not been erased or altered thus to make future searches for or by original families impossible, the steps she will take to safeguard records of agencies known to have been involved in facilitating so-called adoptions prior to the introduction of the statutory adoption regime under the Adoption Act 1952 and subsequently. [15826/12]

Frances Fitzgerald (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy refers to issues relating to records created prior to, and post, the introduction of the statutory regime for adoption in Ireland in the Adoption Act 1952. Therefore, for clarity and to provide the Deputy with as much information as I can, I will deal with both questions separately.

Prior to 1952, there was no statutory regime for adoption as we now understand it. Children were placed in foster care under the Children Act 1908 on an informal basis and may also have been placed privately. Fostering and adoption were not legally differentiated, which led to a number of long-term foster care placements becoming what are now called de facto adoptions. Records relating to these cases are likely to be held in a variety of institutions, including the precursors to health boards and a variety of other private, community and religious institutions involved in providing such services at that time.

It is anticipated that records relating to some of these de facto adoptions were retained by those bodies on the introduction of the statutory regimes for both adoption and fostering, which came into effect in 1953. Therefore, it is possible that some of these records are retained by the HSE, former adoption societies or newly accredited bodies under the Adoption Act 2010.

From the information available to me, it is likely that during the period prior to the introduction of the Adoption Act 1952, private arrangements were entered into where the adoption or fostering arrangement was not recorded and, in fact, some such births were falsely registered in which the "adoptive" parents were registered as the biological parents of the child on the birth certificate. In this case, there may be no records of such arrangements and no way of identifying the possible existence of such records.

There are no provisions regarding the retention and preservation of such records in current legislation and the Adoption Authority has no remit in respect of such matters. Notwithstanding the legal and practical difference between such records and those relating to adoptions under the Adoption Acts, I am extremely conscious that these differences are of limited significance to the individuals involved whose concern is with their personal identity. Therefore, it is a matter which I am actively considering in the context of more general provisions in respect of the adoption (information and tracing) legislation which is currently being developed in my Department.

I will deal with the post-1952 situation in a supplementary reply.

Clare Daly (Dublin North, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister for her reply. As she outlined, this is a hugely important issue for thousands of people, many of whom, as has been acknowledged, were falsely registered or not registered. Meanwhile, records are dotted all over the State which many people cannot access. What steps can the Minister take to safeguard those records? That is the essential question. The Minister herself has admitted that the State has failed these people, but we must see what we can do about it now. For example, I am aware of a record that exists within a 5 km radius of this House which would give indispensable proof to a person who is trying to identify her mother and therefore establish with certainty her own identity. She cannot get those records, however, because they are privately owned and she is fearful for their safety.

There is an onus on the Government to come up with proposals to deal with this situation, if not on a voluntary basis then to seize these records where they exist. This should be done because it was the State which let these people down originally.

Frances Fitzgerald (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy quoted a figure of thousands pre-1952, but we must be careful of the numbers involved. The Adoption Board had 99 people coming forward who believed they were adopted, yet records could not be found. While that is the number of people who have come forward, I take the point that there may well be others who have not made themselves known to the Adoption Authority. Some 50% of those were pre-1952, while the other half were post-1952.

I want to assure the Deputy that the Adoption Act 2010 provides for the safeguarding of records and files held by each accredited body. In addition, each accredited body shall record and preserve all information supplied which relates to the child, including family and medical histories.

Adoption records held by all the former adoption societies which have not sought registration under the Adoption Act 2010 are in the process of being transferred to an accredited body or the HSE in order to provide for their safeguarding in accordance with the provisions of the Act. I do not know if that is the situation that applies to the particular case mentioned by the Deputy. If it could be helpful, I would be happy to respond to a particular case if the Deputy wishes to bring it to my attention. Many records of private institutions which did not seek to be re-registered, will be transferred, kept in a safe place and will be accessible. The HSE has been co-operating fully with all such requests for the transfer of records. The Adoption Authority has oversight of those matters.

There is a separate question of illegal birth registration, which is a different subject.

Clare Daly (Dublin North, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The problem is that not all bodies are accredited and we do not know about many of the files that are out there. I am also aware of consistent backlogs with the HSE's cumbersome approach to try to amalgamate these records and bring them under one roof. We must go out of our way, using either the voluntary route or by legally compelling the centralisation of these records. They should be lodged, photocopied and kept in the National Archives so that they can be accessed by people from all over the world. We are a long way from that but I will probably have to resubmit the question for further discussion at a future date.

Frances Fitzgerald (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I agree with the Deputy abut the importance of this issue. I completely share her views on the question of access to identity and having as much information as possible. We must have the strongest possible legislation to deal with this issue, although there are some constitutional challenges surrounding that.

I want to make it clear, however, that if there are bodies out there holding private information on adoption, that material can be transferred to the HSE which will take charge of it. The HSE will preserve it and the Adoption Authority will have oversight. Those records will be kept in a safe place.

If nobody comes forward who has those records, clearly that is a difficulty. It may be that in the forthcoming tracing legislation we can find a way of addressing some of those aspects. I am in discussions with the Attorney General about how this area could be incorporated into the tracing Bill.