Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)

This point was discussed in some depth the last time we debated the Bill. Senator Terry and Senator McDowell advocated some of the amendments proposed. I note Senator Terry's acknowledgement that the phraseology of the amendments was too wide and, therefore, they needed to be reconsidered.

This amendment relates to equality between adoptive and natural parents but what is being sought would exceed any equality with natural parents. The prenatal leave for natural parents is given on health grounds and is a prudent measure in the late stages of pregnancy. The postnatal leave is to enable the mother to bond with the newborn and adoptive parents are granted an equal period. To give prior leave to adoptive parents does not seem to be the route on which we should embark.

Senator McDowell made an interesting point on this to which I was more sympathetic than to Senator Terry's point, namely, that in many instances the travel abroad involves significant expense. Many who travel are able to fund that from their own resources so it is not an imposition and they are happy to do it. However, people with limited financial resources would find it more difficult to adopt because of the cost involved. Given the increased propensity and need for people to go abroad to adopt, there may be an argument for providing means tested assistance in the social welfare structure for those who cannot fund the trips from their own resources. That would be better than imposing further on employers. Granting leave is not really the issue. The main obstacle for those people in the categories I mention, and to which Senator McDowell referred, is financial. That point is well made and perhaps the Government would consider it in a different framework.