Results 10,981-11,000 of 11,509 for speaker:Ivana Bacik

Seanad: Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (11 Mar 2009)

Ivana Bacik: The Minister of State could draft a similar amendment himself.

Seanad: Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (11 Mar 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I would like clarification, as I did not hear the Minister of State's response to the question asked by Senator Alex White and I on whether section 32 applies to intercountry adoptions. The answer is unclear from reading section 20.

Seanad: Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (11 Mar 2009)

Ivana Bacik: That confirms our points. Is the Minister of State saying that the section applies to all intercountry adoptions?

Seanad: Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (11 Mar 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I would be grateful for that. I hope that the Minister of State will accept an amendment to the effect that adoptive parents might not have a religion. The section is nonsensical if it applies to intercountry adoptions, which form the bulk of adoptions. How can we presume that a child born in Vietnam to Vietnamese parents of the state religion will be of the same religion as the adoptive...

Seanad: Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (11 Mar 2009)

Ivana Bacik: We reserve the right to discuss it on Report Stage.

Seanad: Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (11 Mar 2009)

Ivana Bacik: During the debate on our amendments, amendments Nos. 3 and 20, Senator Norris and I stated that we would table a composite amendment on Report Stage. With this in mind, it is not proposed to press the amendment.

Seanad: Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (11 Mar 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 21: In page 30, subsection (4)(a), line 26, to delete "21" and substitute "18". The age of 21 is inserted in section 33 as the youngest age at which a person may be considered as an adoptive parent in a domestic or intercountry adoption. It struck me as discriminatory towards younger people. I do not know why 18 years cannot be the age. In practice, it is unlikely that...

Seanad: Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (11 Mar 2009)

Ivana Bacik: The authority must be capable of ensuring that the adoptive parents are of the appropriate level of maturity, but 21 does not add much to 18. We believe that people of 18 years of age are mature enough to marry, vote, drive and do just about everything else. It is the general age of majority, although 17 is the age of consent. I do not know why we are discriminating for adoption. I can...

Seanad: Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (11 Mar 2009)

Ivana Bacik: While the amendment seeks to make a sensible change, I would be somewhat cautious about diluting the need for the authority to have regard always to the welfare of the child as being first and paramount. I have a slight concern, particularly in respect of amendment No. 24, that it implies a watering down of the tests required. I can see that the tests could be fulfilled much more quickly in...

Seanad: Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (11 Mar 2009)

Ivana Bacik: It is a much more sensitive and sensible way of doing it than that proposed by section 32. Moreover, it strikes me that this provision conflicts with section 32. If the authority must have regard to ethnic, religious and cultural background while also operating within a presumption that the child is best served by being placed with someone of the same religion as his or her birth mother, it...

Seanad: Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (11 Mar 2009)

Ivana Bacik: Like other Members, I have received useful information from the International Adoption Association about the delays experienced by prospective adopters. We all agree that standards in terms of assessment for suitability for adoption must not be diluted. It must always be the case that any procedure has regard to the welfare of the child as its paramount consideration. The Bill envisages...

Seanad: Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (11 Mar 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 8: In page 23, subsection (5), line 7, to delete "refuses to" and substitute "does not". I am glad to have this opportunity to address the House on this group of amendments because, effectively, they all seek to achieve the same objective. As the Minister of State said, section 18 provides for circumstances where the father cannot be located or the authority does not...

Seanad: Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (11 Mar 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I am grateful to the Minister of State for indicating willingness to consider the matter and I will certainly not press it at this stage. I look forward to some constructive proposals on Report Stage. I would be very grateful if the term "refuses to" was removed as it is perhaps the most loaded term. I am grateful to my colleagues, Senators Quinn and Healy Eames for their support. I note...

Seanad: Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (11 Mar 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I oppose this amendment which is not helpful. Section 19, as drafted, very importantly regards the welfare of the child as the first and paramount consideration, which is in keeping with our international obligations in terms of the rights of the child. To start to qualify or dilute that by creating presumptions would be unhelpful. Senator Alex White already referred to the baby Ann case....

Seanad: Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (11 Mar 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I do not believe the amendment does state the law at present. The law at present, as the Minister of State and I said, is that there is a constitutional presumption that the interests of the child are within the marital family but, in all other matters, while the constitutional preference for the family is there in Article 41, it is not necessarily with the natural parents. We must be...

Seanad: Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (11 Mar 2009)

Ivana Bacik: It is a useful idea. I am not sure this is the best section in which to insert it given this is the section providing for the welfare of the child and, therefore, to include anything else in it seems to be a weakening or a detracting from that paramount consideration. However, it is useful idea to have some sort of duty, be it in statute or guidelines, that the authority would, where...

Seanad: Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (11 Mar 2009)

Ivana Bacik: No.

Seanad: Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (11 Mar 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I thank the Minister of State for that clarification.

Seanad: Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (11 Mar 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I support this amendment. There are instances where the finality of an adoption order may not be appropriate. On Second Stage, I argued that it might be a good idea to provide for special guardianship in this Bill or in other legislation. This is a mechanism provided for in section 115 of the UK Adoption and Children Act 2002. It gives long-term foster carers an additional legal status...

Seanad: Adoption Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (11 Mar 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I am glad of the opportunity to address the House on this section as I flagged this issue on Second Stage. I believe that section 32 adds nothing to, and indeed is in conflict with the Bill. It seems to be in conflict with our international obligations to regard the welfare of the child as the first and paramount consideration. This section is, effectively, a relic of our past. It relates...