Page 688 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 23 March 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
This in itself is not a bad thing. But I again must stress that the Bill has been drafted, in particular, to take care of the child's welfare. That has been the emphasis all along. I can only assume, Madam Speaker, that the main issue here - again, I stress, the child - has been adequately catered for in the Bill to such an extent that this committee is able to make only one recommendation relating directly to the welfare of the child. This recommendation relates to the names of some children being retained after adoption. The Bill allows for the surname of such children to remain the same after adoption, but the committee felt that forenames should also be protected in this way. This allows for the protection of distinctive cultural names, for instance, that may be important to the child either immediately or in the future. Madam Speaker, I believe that this is a sensible recommendation and I am particularly pleased to support it, as I would hate to think that this Assembly has delayed the passage of this Bill by over three months without finding any improvements to the Bill which relate to the welfare of the child directly.
One particular aspect of adoption, Madam Speaker, which the committee did consider at length relates directly to the welfare, rights and needs of the adoptee but cannot be directly legislated for - that is, those adults who are adopted as children and are unaware that they are adopted. As already referred to by the Attorney-General in his presentation of the Bill, this legislation frees up the access to information for people involved in the adoption process. While this will be warmly welcomed by most people in the adoption process, there is no guarantee, Madam Speaker, that a birth parent will not attempt to contact a person who finds himself or herself in this particular situation. In such cases, which the committee hopes and trusts will be few, it will be traumatic for all parties concerned, particularly for the adoptee.
The committee understands that the legislation, when implemented, will be widely publicised both in Australia and overseas so that all parties involved in the adoption process are aware of the changes and what their rights are under the new legislation. However, the committee accepts that no government can legislate to ensure that all adoptive parents tell their adopted children the facts relating to their family history. The committee encourages everyone involved in the adoption process to be aware of this potential and to work towards the alleviation of that trauma.
Madam Speaker, there is one particular issue related to this Bill which has unfortunately gained a certain amount of media speculation in the last few days - the question of homosexual couples being able to adopt. I do not intend to go into the subject as such, but I take this opportunity to correct some apparent misunderstandings surrounding the committee's role in examination of this issue. Madam Speaker, our committee received three late submissions from gay and lesbian lobby groups outlining their particular views. Although late, we agreed to receive and list them in our report along with all other submissions. One of these three submissions made a claim that several successful homosexual adoptions had occurred elsewhere in Australia. Our committee was of the view that this information was dubious. However, we requested the committee secretariat to inquire of other States and Territories about their current adoption laws. The information provided confirmed our understanding that no other State or Territory currently accepts homosexual adoptions. That, Madam Speaker, was the extent to which this question was raised within our committee. On that basis, no reference was made to this issue in our report - a report, I add, agreed to by all five members of the committee.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .