Frances Fitzgerald (Fine Gael)

I move amendment No. 35:

In page 28, between lines 36 and 37, to insert the following:

31.---(1) In this section, "a contact order" means an order requiring the person with whom a child lives, or is to live, to allow the child to visit or stay with the person named in the order, or for that person and the child otherwise to have contact with each other.

(2) Where the father is consulted under section 30(3) of this Act, the Court may make a contact order in favour of the father, on such terms as the Court may see fit.

The amendment makes provision for a contact order, which is permitted in British legislation, where the natural father would have the right to apply for a contact order with the child after adoption. Obviously we are in a different legal scenario from that which exists in the UK. I reference that to make the point that the concept of open adoption and ongoing contact is becoming more prevalent. It is very often seen to be in the child's best interest. Very often adoptive parents themselves are very keen on this concept because they understand that some contact with the biological parent can be beneficial for the child at an appropriate stage.

It is a very different concept of adoption from the traditional one we had which was a closed system. However, we have got to understand more about children's needs. The idea of adoption has developed and grown from countrywide adoption to international adoption. Open adoption may and will become more prevalent in the future. It does not mean endless and ongoing contact. It means that very often by agreement there is contact between the adoptive parents and the biological parent. This can take a very different format. It can be an exchange of photographs or birthday cards. It can be exchanging information about key milestones. Sometimes it can mean physical contact, with the biological parent coming into contact with the child, usually with the agreement, obviously, of the adoptive parents.

This section of the Bill, section 31, attempts to reflect the reality that there is more open adoption. I would be interested in the views of the Minister of State on the matter. Clearly the Constitution, which he has mentioned a number of times, circumscribes how we deal with adoption law here. If we had decided to introduce a constitutional amendment on children and inserted the rights of children into the Constitution, we might have addressed certain sections of the Bill differently. The Minister of State has commented about that matter on a number of occasions when discussing various sections. Given that the Government is considering a constitutional amendment on the rights of children, I would be interested to hear the comments of the Minister of State in that regard. It may be that given our current situation, he cannot accept or even consider this amendment. However, I would like him to outline his understanding of the constitutional issues that arise regarding children given that we do not have a constitutional provision at the moment covering the best interests of the child in his or her own right.