This is a most emotive issue. There have been many complaints about delays in assessing couples for adoption. The Eastern Health Board in particular has been singled out for blame and, of course, people who are hoping to adopt a child have the question of their age hanging over them like the sword of Damocles. The question of age can be debated on another occasion. In these emotive circumstances I can understand why people might prefer if I did not bring forward the problem I see arising. This time last year there was a considerable amount of excitement in the press because at least one agency, which was not registered in this country, was advertising meetings in various hotels and there were financial obligations for those who became involved with it. To some people the price asked seemed to be extremely high. The Minister of State, Deputy Fahey, recognised that this was a case which required urgent legislation but nothing has happened in the interim. This must be a cause of great concern for all of us.
The Minister of State's Department published a major study of inter-country adoptions last year. Ms Vivienne Darling, who was a member of the Adoption Board for 15 years until 1998 and a former head of the department of social studies in Trinity College, pointed out the need for this legislation again recently. She gave as an example the fact that a bilateral agreement with Romania which was made in 1994 proved to be meaningless because couples travelled to Romania in search of children and simply brought them home. The Adoption Board is most reluctant to cause further disruption in the lives of these children by removing them from families. A new agreement was put in place in 1998 which solved some of the problems but the question needs to be addressed in its totality.
International adoption agencies operating outside the State are assisting Irish couples to adopt children from abroad and many people have been extremely grateful for their help. The Adoption Board has brought this fact to the attention of the Department of Health and Children and the board was assured that the promised legislation would address the matter. It was necessary for the board to do this because it is not in a position to reguate the agencies. A year later, nothing has happened.
Deputy Fahey suggested that Irish adoption agencies could be given additional finance to help them facilitate inter-country adoptions. This seemed to me to be a very good idea. No one wants to see the exploitation of people who are hopeful adoptive parents or, worse still, the exploitation of children from abroad. One year on we still await legislation, the advertisements are appearing in the newspapers again and figures between $10,000 and $20,000 are being mentioned. These are very large sums of money.
I hope the Minister of State has some news on this matter, at the core of which are children who cannot afford to delay any longer.
Ms Hanafin: I thank Senator Henry for raising an issue which is close to her heart and to my own. It is an area on which I look forward to working. Senator Henry referred to an unregistered adoption agency. I do not know the agency to which she is referring but the general issue is one which is worth addressing.
Dr. Henry: It is.
Ms Hanafin: Under the existing legislation a society may apply to the Adoption Board for registration under the Adoption Act, 1952. Sections 32 to 39 of that Act, as amended, prescribe the criteria to be met for registration. Such agencies may then make arrangements in relation to adoption, including the assessment of couples and the placement of children with suitable couples. In the area of inter-country adoption one such society, PACT, is currently carrying out assessments for inter-country adoption.
Under section 6 of the Adoption Act, 1974, it is unlawful for any body or persons, other than registered adoption societies or health boards, to make or attempt to make any arrangements for the adoption of a child. Inter-country adoption is a phenomenon which only dates back to the late 1980s in Ireland with the first specific legislative provisions in relation to foreign adoptions being made in the Adoption Acts of 1991 and 1998. As it stands, any agency can apply to the Adoption Board for registration and will be considered under the criteria provided for in the legislation.
Sending countries have their own legislative and regulatory structures regarding the adoption of children. The bulk of inter-country adoptions involve the adoption of a child in their country of origin. I am aware that many such adoptions are carried out with the assistance of "mediating" or "placement" agencies in the country of origin. Some countries of origin provide these services through state structures. Others provide for the accreditation of native agencies to arrange for foreign couples to adopt a child. Some allow third country agencies to make such arrangements. Such agencies are prevented from advertising in Ireland and from accepting payments or other rewards in consideration of the adoption of the child in Ireland. The board has raised in its recent report its concerns about these agencies and the fact that they are unable to regulate agencies which are based outside the state under current legislation. However, the Adoption Board has no jurisdiction to prevent sending countries accrediting agencies to make such arrangements in respect of the adoption of children in those countries.
An Irish adoption order is not made in respect of such children. On return to this country, an application is made to the Adoption Board to have the child registered in the register of foreign adoption assuming the effects of the adoption in the country of origin are the same as the effects of an adoption order made under Irish law. Children so registered are deemed to have the same status and rights as children adopted under Irish law.
In the late 1980s the Hague Conference decided to deal with the subject of inter-country adoption. There were three main reasons. First, "the dramatic increase in international adoptions which had occurred in many countries since the late 1960s to such an extent that inter-country adoption had become a world-wide phenomenon involving migration of children over long geographical distances from one society and culture to another very different environment". Second, "the serious and complex human problems partly already known but aggravated as a result of these new developments, partly new ones, with among other things, manifold complex legal aspects". Third, "insufficient existing domestic and international legal instruments and the need for a multilateral approach". Ireland has signed but not yet ratified the convention.
The Hague Convention on the Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Inter-country Adoption, 1993 was drawn up to provide safeguards to prevent the abduction or the sale of children and to establish a system of co-operation among countries to ensure that inter-country adoptions take place in the best interests of the child concerned. Essentially, it was drawn up to create links between ratifying countries so that gaps arising in the inter-country processes could be closed by ensuring that there was a link between sending and receiving states' internal regulatory and administrative procedures.
In the context of continuing work on the preparation of legislation to ratify the convention, my officials have been considering the accreditation of agencies to mediate the placement of children from aboard with couples who have been granted declarations of eligibility and suitability by the Adoption Board. Practice abroad has shown that there a number of positive features to such agencies being involved in the inter-country adoption process. It has been seen that they can develop an expertise in the area, particularly if there is specialisation in particular countries. By operating on the ground in both countries they can assist in ensuring good practice in the matching children and the hand over process. They can also develop good post-adoption support networks for children and their families.
There are concerns about such agencies, some of which were raised by Senator Henry. These concerns relate to the fees being paid for mediating services and the competition for children between such agencies which can effectively generate markets for children. I share these concerns and would abhor a situation in which this would be allowed to continue. I see the ratification of the Hague Convention, therefore, as a priority to ensure that mediating agencies involved in the adoption process demonstrate high ethical standards, a non-profit ethos and that they view adoption from a child-centred perspective, namely with the best interests of the child as paramount.
In considering the issue of the accreditation of agencies, my officials have been looking abroad to those countries which have a longer tradition of inter-country adoption. It is notable that third country agencies are not allowed to operate in many of these countries - these are agencies providing services in a sending country to couples from a third receiving country. Native agencies operate in a closely monitored environment and have strict codes of ethics of their own. Many have development work as their primary service with child sponsoring and adoption as secondary to their primary development objectives.
An acceptance that agencies can operate in an ethical and child-centred manner is essential to any decision in this area. So, too, is a detailed development of the possible regulatory controls which can be imposed on such agencies in the legislation to ratify the convention. Without further details, I cannot respond specifically to the particular issue raised by the Senator. However, I should point out that any unregistered bodies are prohibited from advertising under section 4 of the Adoption Act, 1952, and from receiving payment in consideration of the adoption of a child. Any improper financial gain in connection with adoption is also prohibited under the Hague Convention. The high level of fees being charged by agencies in some countries has been drawn to my attention. Many couples are, however, prepared to pay these large sums and fail to bring their concerns to the attention of the Adoption Board. Where couples have done so, I am aware that the board has been attempting to monitor the situation and in one case, through the Hague Convention network, to actively seek an explanation of the high fee levels and to negotiate a limit on such fees.
This matter will be dealt with under the legislation to ratify the Hague Convention. Work is continuing apace on the preparation of the legislation which now falls under my remit and I see this as a priority area if we are to deal adequately with the many complex issues which arise in relation to inter-country adoption.
Dr. Henry: I thank the Minister of State for her reply and look forward to the legislation being approached with a sense of urgency.
