Seanad debates

Tuesday, 17 February 2009

Adoption Bill 2009: Second Stage

 

5:00 pm

Photo of Fiona O'MalleyFiona O'Malley (Progressive Democrats)

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Andrews. I particularly welcome this long overdue Bill which introduces into Irish law the contents of the Hague Convention. That measure, which is long overdue, is one reason to welcome the introduction of this Bill. I want to make one or two other comments on this timely Bill. We need to update and modernise our legislation. Senator Quinn spoke about the joy this Bill will bring to families and to children in the care of the State. It is far nicer to be in a caring and loving home than to be in the care of the State. We should try to facilitate the swiftest possible placement of children in permanent homes.

I agree with Senator Corrigan that foster parents who have built relationships with children should be able to adopt them where possible. She also referred to one of the flaws of the Bill which is the notion that children whose parents are married cannot be adopted. Any child who has been abandoned for whatever reason deserves the greatest protection possible. If his or her parents will not look after him or her, if the child has been left to the care of the State, he or she should not be excluded from adoption if it is in the child's interests. One good aspect of this Bill is that it absolutely and totally states that the care of the child is the central and most important thing. That is as it should be. We all know a child is better off in a loving home than in an institution. There should be no barrier. I ask the Minister of State to consider this question. I am interested to hear his opinion. Should children who have been abandoned be ineligible for adoption simply because their parents are married?

Senator Corrigan also spoke about the procedures that should be in place when those who claim to be the parents of unaccompanied minors come to collect them. She made the good point that if the stories of those involved tally, that is reason enough to release a child into the hands of whoever has come to collect him or her. It is easy to determine whether somebody is genuinely a child's parent. DNA testing can be carried out, for example. Children deserve that care. If a child is in the care of the State, he or she should be given the best available care. We know that all children do not necessarily get such care. We have the strongest obligation to such people. We need to ensure children left in the care of the State grow up in the most loving environment possible. It is better to facilitate adoption in such circumstances, naturally, because it is better to bring children into a loving home.

Senator Walsh will not be surprised to hear that I wish to respond to some of the comments he made earlier. The Minister of State made it clear that any decision that is made must be in the best interests of the child. That is as it should be. I argue that there is no room for making judgments about certain arrangements in a home. We all need to reflect on this point. In an ideal world, life would be as uncomplicated as it was when everyone was born into a family with a mother and a father. As we all know, life is a little more complicated now than it was when the family norm tended to be a heterosexual couple. I am not addressing the question of whether homosexual couples should be allowed to marry. One's sexual orientation does not reduce one's capacity to rear a child in a loving environment. I do not think it should be a factor. I understand that such matters might not be to everyone's taste. I do not think the State should take it upon itself to have the right to interfere in people's homes in this manner.

Naturally, everyone should be equally subject to the normal forms of rigorous testing or screening — the correct term escapes me — that apply to any couple or person who wishes to adopt a child. Being heterosexual does not make one a better parent. The case in Roscommon that came to light last month proves that point. No parent, even a biological parent, has a prerogative in terms of good care and the ability to cherish a child. There are failures everywhere and we need to be cognisant of that and accept that family life is different now than it was in the past. We should not necessarily take religions into account. There are cultural interests but we are already dealing with inter-country adoptions where children from African or Asian cultures have come to live here and have adapted well. What a child needs most is love and it does not matter where it gets it. If it can be placed in a loving home, regardless of the parental arrangements, that is as it should be.

I commend the Bill. As we go through Committee Stage we might consider extending and improving it; I am sure the Minister of State will be interested in that. I thank him for bringing it to the House and I look forward to its passage.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.