David Norris (Independent)

I second the amendment. I agree completely with the argument made by Senator Fitzgerald. It is human to want to trace relatives as some stage in one's life, no matter how successful and happy is the adoption. In addition, increasingly adoptees are seeking information about their parental background in terms of illness profile and genetic predisposition to certain illnesses and so on. The sentimental and the practical are grounds for keeping the register. In other words, the information should be retained in a secure form.

The second part of the amendment deals with security in a slightly different manner in that it refers to security from prying eyes and the gaze of persons who have no right to the information because it is personal and private. I am astonished to have received information that the register is wide open. Such records are open to anyone and the people who have briefed me feel strongly that this material should be held in private, as is the case with domestic adoptions. Will the Minister of State comment on the accuracy or otherwise of the assertion that information held is openly or widely available, which is a cause of distress to those involved in these cases? I am not aware whether that is the case but the issue has been brought to my attention. My brief states, "Currently these records are open to anyone and should be held in private, as in domestic adoption." I am taking what I have been told in good faith but I am curious because if this is the situation, it is not positive or good.