In raising this matter I have to recognise the history surrounding the treatment of fostered, adopted and institutionalised children which continues into their adult lives. Decisions affecting their childhood are made on their behalf and continue to be made long after they cease to be children. It is a case of the "does he take sugar" syndrome where decisions are made for people without asking them what they want. It is symptomatic that the person with responsibility for studying post-adoption services legislation is the Minister of State with special responsibility for children.
I am talking about the treatment of adopted people above the age of 18, their birth mothers and their adoptive families whenever any of these adults seek information from State records concerning their origins and family relationships. We need to put a system in place which works for everyone involved. Why, when adopted people seek this information, can they not receive it in a direct way? A better way can surely be found to deal with post-adoption issues which recognises that adopted and fostered children and children raised in institutions have, as adults, the same rights as all other autonomous and responsible individuals in their dealings with the State.
I am talking about the simple right of adopted and fostered children to information on their origins. It is argued that there are conflicting rights but this is a myth. The organisations which represent adopted people, birth mothers and adoptive families have many interests in common. There are representatives of the birth mothers' association and the adopted people's association in the Gallery. These associations want legislation to be implemented that will safeguard their right of access to the vital information they need. There is a shared desire to bury a shameful past. There has been much unnecessary pain and suffering in relation to these issues and it is time to deal with them directly in legislation.
Adopted and fostered people as well as those who passed through the old industrial and reformatory schools have been left, in many cases, with no personal history or heritage and have been denied medical information vital to safeguard their families. Birth mothers and adoptive parents have had great difficulty in obtaining the information they require. We need a body constituted under legislation with the power and duty to inform those people directly concerned. We need a post-adoption services board which would safeguard the right to privacy of those few people, be they birth parents, adopted people, adopting parents or others, who have no wish to make contact.
The needs of those personally affected by adoption and fostering go well beyond a contact register. The new board would be responsible for maintaining a central register of all adoption, fostering and child institution files, including copies of all adoption agency files. It would provide practical, non-judgmental advice on all relevant matters and ensure counselling is available to all those who need it. Counselling should not be a precondition to obtaining information. The board would also involve itself in ongoing research. Adequate funding and personnel resources should be provided. This is essential.
These proposals are modest and deserve consideration. People who have been affected by adoption should be treated properly in accordance with their basic human rights. The Government should live up to its responsibilities as a signatory to the UN Charter on the Rights of the Child which states that a child should be registered immediately after birth, should have the right from birth to a name, the right to acquire a nationality and, as far as possible, the right to know and be cared for by his or her parents.
The issue is not as complex as some may suggest. It has been resolved successfully in many other jurisdictions. The recent Supreme Court decision clears the way for legislation. The people affected are in a legal quagmire. They can attempt to conduct their own research, sometimes with the paid help of private detective agencies, but, at best, this is a hit and miss affair. An adopted person may find a list of every parent who has given up a child for adoption on his or her own date of birth and may track down each potential parent but this can be a distressing activity and cannot be allowed to continue. In effect, people are travelling around the country trying to make contact. I am proposing that this accidental and chaotic system should be replaced by one which is integrated and planned by the State. That is the way forward.
