Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 01 Hansard (Tuesday, 10 February 2004) . . Page.. 88 ..

In the view of the opposition, the best interests of the child when it comes to adoption are served by having a mother and a father who will raise that child in a loving, caring relationship. People might say that some marriages are dreadful, some marriages break down and some heterosexual relationships are appalling. The debate is not about that. Children’s interests are not served by being in that type of relationship. Conversely, people might say that some gay relationships are terribly promiscuous. The debate is not about arguments like that either. It is about the best interests of the child.

This is about looking at who are good people to adopt a child. I am not going to deal with negative things or relationships that break down. I am going to deal with what is in the best interests of the child if this bill gets up, as it appears it will, when a heterosexual couple seeks to adopt a child or a same-sex couple seeks to adopt a child, all of whom are good people.

There is a lot of evidence in relation to what is best for children in terms of adoption. It is interesting to look at how many people are adopted in Australia each year. The ABS statistics and those from the state government agencies show that the rate of adoption in each state or territory is extremely low. In Australia there were 9,789 adoption orders in 1971-72 and only 561 in 2001-02, of which 20 were in Tasmania and an estimated seven were in the ACT. In 2002-03 only two took place in Tasmania.

The paper prepared by the Australian Christian Lobby in August last year stated that the right of gay and lesbian couples to adopt children would place considerable pressure on an already low rate of adoption in each state and would also discriminate against heterosexual couples, who have the only naturally derived right to have children. There are very few of that type of adoption. There are other types of adoption; there are intercountry adoptions. Looking at the documents, I am not aware that any of those have been successful.

The Australian Christian Lobby states:

It can similarly be argued that the move to allow gay and lesbian couples to adopt children is inconsistent with Australia’s international convention obligations. This is because “the best interests of the child” is a principle that underpins and is explicit in the Hague Convention on the Protection of Children and Co-operation in respect of Inter Country Adoption. This is why, according to the international adoption section of DOCS NSW and private adoption agencies in WA, no inter-country adoption has ever taken place anywhere in the world to a gay or lesbian couple. This is despite the fact that countries like the Netherlands, UK and USA internally allow same sex couples to adopt children.

In addressing the explicit intentions and ideological underpinnings of the Hague Convention the following are pertinent extracts from the Convention.

Preamble

The States signatory to the present Convention,

Recognizing that the child, for the full and harmonious development of his or her personality, should grow up in a family environment, in an atmosphere of happiness, love and understanding…

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .