Page 3104 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 16 September 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Adoption is, unfortunately, one of those areas where the public narratives can become overly simplified. People are either pro-adoption or anti-adoption. Some people say that adoption processes in Australia are too slow and that governments are hostile to adoption as a solution for children. Some point to Australia’s difficult history on adoption. Our attitudes can become polarised as our society addresses issues such as forced adoptions and the stolen generation and as we give thought to the number of children, both in Australia and overseas, that are in need of a permanent, loving and stable family.
The notion that adoption processes are too slow is one that needs to be approached cautiously. It was a discussion that ran last year when the former Prime Minister Tony Abbott made announcements about speeding up inter-country adoptions, seemingly oblivious to the fact that the primary delays around inter-country adoption occur in the country of origin. But in general it is somewhat overly simplistic as there are often good reasons as to why the processes are slow, and I think there should be general caution when people advocate for streamlining processes without being specific about details. “Streamlining” can be code for cutting corners, and that is something that we do not wish to see in this area.
The processes that cannot be cut short are those that involve conversations with the children’s birth family and extended birth family; processes that involve either seeking consent for an adoption or to waive that consent. These are complex issues and the rights of birth parents are extremely important. Even if they are living chaotic lives, even if they are unable to care for their child at any point in time, they deserve our support and our respect for them as parents and their views must be heard. The processes that we have around this must be absolutely water tight as no-one wants to see the right of birth parents overridden. That does not bode well for birth parents or adoptive families, let alone the children involved.
On the other hand, the government agencies that are involved with adoptions, especially those that are involved with preparing the necessary complicated documentation, must aim to ensure that administrative processes are streamlined and be cognisant that any unnecessary administrative delays are impacting on a family and on their ability to move forward as a family. It is probably easy for those who are not in that situation to wonder why another month or two, or even six, makes any difference; but for adoptive parents who are looking for certainty it does make a difference.
Officials must work hard to ensure that things are done right—and done right the first time—that administrative processes are not repetitive or redundant and that they are simple for adoptive parents to follow. This is true for Community Services Directorate officials, Government Solicitor’s Office officials and Supreme Court officials. As we move towards a model that embraces permanency for children rather than the merry-go-round of foster placements that we know can sometimes cause so much damage, the system needs to acknowledge and implement practices that deliver that stability as soon as possible.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video