Seanad debates

Tuesday, 17 February 2009

Adoption Bill 2009: Second Stage

 

4:00 pm

Photo of David NorrisDavid Norris (Independent)

I welcome the Minister of State to the House. This Bill is overdue and I compliment him on introducing most, although not all, of the measures required of it. Unfortunately, however, substantial gaps remain in the legislation. Astonishingly, legislation to regularise adoption was first introduced in 1952. Adoptions had previously been arranged informally and certain rather unfortunate circumstances arose as a result. Approximately eight amending Acts have since been passed but this is the first time a major step has been taken on the matter.

I welcome that the Minister of State makes clear that the rights of the child are paramount. That is as it should be. I am glad too that he gives a degree of recognition to the rights of fathers. I hope to God that may to some degree cork up John Waters because he is completely obsessional on this issue. I have spoken about it but he seems to think it is the only thing on the face of the planet. A right has been set out in that regard and I am glad fathers have been given a consultative role. While the Bill probably does not go far enough, at least it moves in the right direction.

In regard to the very difficult situation in which the mother cannot or will not identify the father, genetic information is increasingly important in terms of disease control, advance warning and questions about the subsequent marriage of children. I am grateful, therefore, that measures have been introduced in this regard.

Two principal gaps exist in the Bill, the first of which is the complete absence of post-adoption counselling. This has been recommended by all the bodies consulted about the legislation and I wonder if the omission is simply due to an absence of cash. I am aware that we are facing a grim situation but this represents the future, and I ask the Minister of State to reconsider this issue.

The second gap comprises the missed opportunity in regard to same sex recognition. Last week, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties gave a valuable briefing on this subject which was attended by Members of the Minister of State's party. I imagine he is the kind of man who would have attended were he not in office. A Bill has been proposed on same sex recognition but the one issue it signally fails to address is adoption, even in regard to a gay person's own children. Some people in this House have produced ludicrous waffle about the family as if they are unaware that in certain circumstances the family is toxic to children. I am not going to rehearse the arguments made by these people, who we know well enough. Even today, a slightly batty article was published in The Irish Times by a priest who suggested that the family is so dreadful that everyone should become a priest. He argued that the family is awful and leads to alcoholism, abuse and separation. The article is actually quite funny if it is read in a certain way.

It emerged in the briefing by the ICCL that the British Government used the opportunity of reforms to that country's adoption legislation to introduce full adoption for gay parents in advance of domestic partnership legislation. We often follow the example set by the British Government but it is a pity that we have not done so in the context of this Bill. I am aware the issue is a political hot potato but the backwoods people can certainly be faced down. Is it not idiotic that one gay man or woman can adopt whereas a gay couple cannot be regarded as a family? If the adoptive parent dies, the child has no right to inherit from the non-guardian parent. That is legal nonsense and it represents a missed opportunity. These two lacunae vitiate the Bill. The legislation is lacking, although that does not mean it does not make improvements.

I presume the issue of inter-country adoptions has been raised previously. Of the approximately 4,500 adoptions which have been carried out since 1991, between 30% and 40% have involved non-Hague Convention countries. That issue is not adequately addressed in the Bill for various reasons. Russia would fall outside the Bill's remit because although it has established bilateral arrangements with other countries, we have no such arrangements. I remind Members of the work done by Adi Roche and the way in which the Chernobyl children have gone to the hearts of Irish people. If Irish people want to adopt and cherish these children, for God's sake let us not block them. Obstacles arose on the other side when children were unable to obtain visas to come to Ireland because of bureaucratic problems in Russia. I want to know the Minister of State's plans regarding Russia. Ethiopia is a huge mess but recent analysis indicates that its adoption law is compatible with our system. However, we have not established a bilateral agreement on adoption. Vietnam is one of the most popular countries for adoption and I am aware the Minister of State has stated his intention to establish a new bilateral arrangement. However, the current arrangement expires at the end of April and the exchange of draft agreements has not yet taken place. I ask him to outline to the House the current state of play in that regard.

The Law Reform Commission and all the adoption agencies sought the inclusion in the Bill of a grandfather clause. If a family in Ireland adopts a child from a non-Hague Convention country, a grandfather clause would make it easier to adopt a second child. The reason this is regarded as valuable is because a child from a distant country and alien civilisation might otherwise be denied the opportunity of being raised with a sibling.

The basis for the creation of an adoption court or a fully independent adoption agency appears insufficient. Everything must pass through the Health Service Executive bureaucracy, which is already overwhelmed.

The Children's Rights Alliance sets out four wishes for the Bill and the Minister of State has provided for all of them except the last, that is, post-adoption counselling. Information is also important. I have been approached by middle aged and elderly people who have no idea of the identity of their parents. Some of them were surrendered to Church of Ireland homes by well meaning people but for social or other reasons, records of their parents were deliberately not kept. That is an awful deprivation for citizens of this country.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.