I welcome the Minister.
Adoption (Identity and Information) Bill 2014: Committee and Remaining Stages
Section 1 agreed to.
SECTION 2
I move amendment No. 1:
In page 6, line 35, after “the” where it secondly occurs to insert the following:
“name (or, if the person has been known during his or her life by more than one name, current and former names), date of birth and ”.
This amendment is designed to make it clear that data relating to the birth, placement of adoption, procurement of adoption and adoption of the adopted person, where referred to in the Bill, will include the names, former names and dates of birth of the natural parents. This information is important to enable adoptees to establish the identity of their natural parents where the parents have a common name. Let us suppose adoptees are only given a parent's name without the rest of this information. If the name is unusual, then the adoptees could readily trace the identity of their parents. Many of these records are publicly available. I carried out a search last week. I had the name of an individual. I was able to get the birth certificate with the mother's name on it as well as all of those details straight away because the individual has an unusual name and was the only person with that name born within a ten-year period. However, someone could be in a different situation whereby the mother has a common name, for example, Mary Murphy or Mary O'Brien. There may have been several births within a short period to women of the name in question and, therefore, only having the name is of limited value. We have tabled the amendment to ensure adoptees can gain access to the other information recorded on the register of births to assist them in establishing the identity of their natural parents.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendments Nos. 2 to 5, inclusive, are related and may be discussed together.
I move amendment No. 2:
In page 7, to delete lines 3 and 4 and substitute the following:
“(a) where the child is, was or has been placed (including placement in foster care) with a person or body under the Child Care Act 1991 or equivalent legislation,”.
These amendments are purely designed to make some grammatical changes and to take account of the fact that a person may have been subject to similar legislation prior to the enactment of the 1991 and 2001 Acts. We are tabling these amendments in response to the remarks of the Minister on Second Stage, what we have heard from groups and individuals involved and in the absence of hearings of the Joint Committee on Health and Children. We took the view that we needed to progress the Bill because certain people are waiting for it. That is why we are putting forward these amendments. They are technical in nature.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 3:
In page 7, line 5, to delete “is placed” and substitute “is, was or has been placed”.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 4:
In page 7, line 5, after “2001” to insert “or equivalent legislation”.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 5:
In page 7, line 6, to delete “has been placed” and substitute “is, was or has been placed”.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 6:
In page 7, to delete lines 21 to 25 and substitute the following:
“ “personal data held in respect of the adopted person” includes personal data relating to the birth, placement for adoption, procurement of adoption or adoption of the adopted person that identifies the adopted person, natural parent or parents or adoptive parent or parents of an adopted person. It also includes, subject to the provisions of this Act, the name (or, if the person has been known during his or her life by more than one name, current and former names), date of birth and contact details of the adopted person and natural parent or parents, where available;”.
This is related to amendment No. 1. It is an expanded definition of personal data held in respect of the adopted person. It is designed in part to make it clear that personal data held in respect of the adopted person include the names, former names and dates of birth of the natural parents for the reasons I have outlined.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 7:
In page 7, line 28, after “2010),” to insert “former and surviving spouse, former and surviving civil partner, former and surviving cohabitant,”.
This amendment serves to ensure that a person's former and surviving spouses, civil partners and cohabitants are included in the definition of a relative.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 2, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 3
I move amendment No. 8:
In page 8, line 20, to delete “person.” and substitute the following:
“person, including, but not limited to, the date of birth, occupation and address of each natural parent where these details are listed in the register of births, but not including the Personal Public Service number of a natural parent.”.
This is designed to clarify that the date of birth, occupation and address of the natural parents, as listed on the birth certificate, will be made available to the adopted person, subject to compliance with the provisions of the Bill. However, the personal public service number of the natural parent will not be made available. This is to address a concern flagged to us. Some people were concerned that the Bill could allow for the release of PPS numbers, although we understood the restriction was implicit in the Bill already. We wish to clarify that it does not.
While I do not oppose the amendment, I reiterate that I foresee constitutional difficulties with the Private Members' Bill. It differs from the Bill being prepared by my Department. It does not differentiate between prospective and retrospective adoptions. In this respect it does not address the complex constitutional issues that arise in respect of the provision of identifying information to those and about those who were adopted in the past. The legal advice I have received indicates that the right to know one's identity flows from the legal relationship between the birth mother and her child. However, the effect of an adoption order is to restrict that right to know.
While I am in favour of providing adopted persons with as much information as possible about their identity, there is a difficulty surrounding the notion that a birth mother's constitutional right to privacy can be dispensed with or retrospectively changed by new legislation. As Senators are aware, my Department is developing the heads of the adoption (information and tracing) Bill. Work on the heads of that Bill is nearing completion. It will set out the information to be provided and the circumstances in which it can be provided for past and future adoptions. The Bill will be explicit on the information that must be provided for all future adoptions. All who consent to an adoption will be fully aware of the information that will be available to adopted persons on request once they reach 18 years of age.
In regard to adoptions that have taken place in the past, the issue is far more complex. I am advised that the proposed legislation can provide for retrospective identifying information to be given to an adopted person, but some restrictions must apply in respect of birth mothers who wish to protect their right to privacy. I would be concerned that the Private Members' Bill does not fully address these constitutional issues, but I am not opposing the amendment.
As we outlined on Second Stage, we appreciate there are two rights at play here, namely, the adoptees' right to their identity and the natural parent's right to privacy. The courts have made it clear that neither of these rights is absolute. That point was made in the IO'T v. B case, and has been consistently made in constitutional cases with respect to all the rights in the Constitution. There is not a single right in the Constitution that is absolute. All of them must be balanced against competing rights within our constitutional framework.
The courts have also made it clear that the job of seeking to achieve a workable balance between competing constitutional rights is that for the Oireachtas. The Supreme Court jurisprudence makes it very clear that it is only when a case has to be brought in the first instance, and it is only if the court is of the view that the Oireachtas has got the balance completely wrong, that it will interfere. Many legal commentators would say that the Supreme Court is too deferential to the Oireachtas but under our system, the separation of powers makes it very clear that it is the job of the Oireachtas to legislate. Any Act, on being signed by the President, immediately enjoys the presumption of constitutionality. That is then only challenged if the President refers the legislation to the Supreme Court under Article 26 to test the constitutionality of a Bill or if an individual brings a case challenging it. However, when this legislation is passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas, as I hope it will be with the Minister's co-operation, it will benefit from the presumption of constitutionality.
We are confident that the Bill is constitutionally sound. We have got extensive legal advice on it. Dr. Fergus Ryan, who drafted the Bill for us, is a constitutional law expert. I have consulted with other constitutional law experts who are also of the view that the Bill is constitutional. I accept these issues are arguable. That is always the situation until the Supreme Court hears a case on an individual item of legislation. Nobody can say with certainty that it would or would not uphold the Bill. One only knows that when the court considers the case, but the arguments that it is constitutional are persuasive.
We carefully balanced the two rights. In fact, it is arguable that the current situation is unconstitutional because in elevating the privacy rights of the natural parent, we have nullified any right to an identity. The current balance, if it can be called that, between privacy and identity is that in order to protect the privacy rights of some women who may wish to exert privacy, and we should be clear that that is not all of them, and for whom this may be an issue, we are prepared to ignore and give no value to the identity rights of 50,000, 60,000 or 70,000 Irish adoptees. That is not a balance, and that is not correct.
Our Bill balances the two rights in a way we believe is fair. It makes the distinction between the adoptees' right to identity and to have identifying information about themselves and their family background and contact, which we accept is a different issue. The Bill makes it very clear that the adoptive parents contact details will only be released if they are happy for those details to be released. That is a fair system. It also puts in place an intermediary arrangement through which adoptees and natural parents may have contact with each other. If the natural parent is seeking to reach out to the adopted son or daughter, he or she can contact the Adoption Authority and do that and vice versa, where an adoptee wishes to make contact with his or her natural parent.
We must be clear that the current arrangement does not prevent unwanted contact. If anything, it makes it much more likely because even without a statutory right to one's birth certificate and the ability to get this information straight away as a matter of right from the Adoption Authority, adoptees can get the information themselves. They can do their own trace. Detailed guidelines have been produced by the Adoption Rights Alliance and others to assist people in doing a trace. As I said, the birth records are public documents. If one can narrow it down to a name or even a year, an adoptee can go in, look at his or her birth date and ascertain straight away from the public records the name of every female baby born on that date, if a woman is trying to do a trace. They can get the names of all the natural mothers, usually the only name on the birth certificate. They can then narrow that down using other information they are able to ascertain such as geography, and particularly if the name is unusual. They can quickly go from having a name on the birth certificate to ascertaining somebody's address.
They can refer to the electoral register. Most of the electoral registers are now online. I looked at them again last week. People can get access to the Dublin city electoral register from the comfort of their home on their laptop and get the home address. If they have a name they can get the home address of where they lived in the mid-1960s from the electoral registers because those documents are public. That takes a great deal of effort, and it is disheartening for people to have to do that on their own. It is a lonely journey, but it is not impossible and people do it, and when they get to the end of the road and they have the information, because there is no intermediary for them to go through, their only option is to make direct contact with the natural parent concerned or vice versa, if it is a natural parent tracing their adopted adult son or daughter. Nobody wants to do that. That is not a supportive situation for anybody.
As an adopted person, when I reunited with my mother I was so conscious of being sensitive to her needs and not knowing the circumstances of my birth or how difficult that may have been for her and the difficulty of the adoption. We would all prefer to have a system that is supportive of everybody concerned and has an intermediary, rather than putting people in the situation where they have to write letters out of the blue, make telephone calls or turn up on somebody's doorstep. Nobody wants to do this.
The current arrangements do not prevent unwanted contact. The arrangements we are proposing would deal with that issue but it is important to distinguish, as the Bill does, between access to identifying information and contact. Not every adoptee wishes to have contact or to re-establish a relationship with their parents. Some do, but some do not. Some simply want to know who they are. They want their own records if they spent time in a mother and baby home. They want to know if they were subject to vaccine trials. They want the rest of their medical history. They do not all necessarily wish to meet, and those who do handle it in a very sensitive way. Our approach to this area has been based on the false assumption that adoptees are irrational, insensitive people who will force themselves into the lives and the homes of their natural parents. That is incredibly offensive and unfair. It is not true, and if that is the situation in a tiny minority of cases, and that is possible under our current arrangements, we have other laws to deal with this. We have laws on harassment and so on, which are completely separate, but to assume the worst case scenario, and legislate for the worst case scenario, is incredibly unfair. It has done a great disservice to thousands of adoptees and their natural parents. It has also done a huge disservice to the women involved.
I have had a great deal of correspondence, as have Senators Jillian van Turnhout and Fidelma Healy Eames, from natural mothers since I first started talking about this issue, and many of them told me that far from seeking confidentiality, they were forced by clergy to sign agreements and swear oaths. Their baby was taken from them in the hospital immediately after they gave birth, when they were not in a fit state of mind. They were bullied into putting their child up for adoption and bullied into signing forms. I would love the Minister, the Adoption Authority or anybody else to produce a confidentiality agreement that was actually sought by an actual mother because my understanding was that it worked the other way around. The women were forced to sign papers. They were forced to swear oaths saying they would never look for their child. Many of those women have carried the hurt and the pain of that for years.
The last time we brought forward this Bill, Philomena Lee issued a plea to the Minister and the Government to accept it. She said that if this Bill had been in place when she went looking for her son, Anthony, and indeed when Anthony was looking for her, she would have met him before he died.
However, she did not meet him, because of all the secrecy and the assumption that women do not want to be reunited with their children when that is not the case. We accept, of course, that there will be some cases where women might not wish to do this. They might find it difficult because the circumstances of the birth might have been difficult for them or they might not be in a place yet where they are ready to deal with it. However, the Adoption Authority reaching out to them, making them aware of the fact that their son or daughter is looking for them and an offer of counselling might provide those women with the space to think and talk about it. For some of them it might be the first time they have talked to anybody for years.
Women have approached me to tell me their stories. One lady, who is in her 70s, told me that she gave her child up for adoption 40 years ago but she never had a conversation with anybody about it. She broke down telling me what had happened. There are many such women. I have also been contacted by women who told me that they stayed silent for so long because they were worried that their spouses would not be happy or that their sons or daughters would be annoyed that they had had a child before they were married and had not told anybody. All of those women told me that when they reached out and told their family about the child they had put up for adoption, the reaction of their sons, daughters and spouses was to ask why they had not told them about it previously. Many of the women are trapped in pain from the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s as a result of how women were treated then and the judgmental attitude there was towards them. However, they find that when they tell their adult sons and daughters about the child given up for adoption, the sons or daughters tend to say, "My God, you are my mother. I cannot believe you have been carrying this pain. Let me help you." In fact, the sons and daughters help them to get through it and look after their mother in re-establishing a relationship with the adopted child.
It is not right that, due to some obsessive and irrational fear of the worst case scenario, we do nothing for 50,000 to 60,000 adoptive people and their natural parents. It is based on false assumptions that the women do not wish to be contacted. That is not the case. In many circumstances many of them have beaten paths back to the mother and baby homes. It was Sean Ross Abbey in Philomena's case, and other women have returned to the orders seeking information but have been denied it. They, as much as their adopted sons and daughters, are equally seeking to have this legislation in place and asking the Minister to work with us in bringing it forward.
I note the Minister mentioned that he is still working on the Government's adoption information and tracing legislation. That is disappointing. There is a Bill before him that has the support of the House. It received the overwhelming support of the Fine Gael and Labour Party spokespersons on Second Stage, for which I thank them. We acknowledge that it is not perfect and we would like to work with the Minister on it. We hope that he will table amendments on Report Stage to address any of the concerns he has. However, we have a Bill while the Government does not even have the heads of a Bill, and there is only a year left. These women cannot wait any longer. I am constantly contacted by people who tell me that by the time they finally got the information they required, the person they were seeking, whether it was their mother or sibling, had passed away.
We have an opportunity to do something and we hope the Minister will work with us on doing it. We accept there is a constitutional context but we have done a great deal of work to ensure the Bill is constitutionally sound. However, we are more than willing to meet with the Minister outside the House to discuss it and to have our legal experts meet the Minister's experts to thrash this out. We must find a way of moving this forward. The excuses about why it is difficult are not enough. If the Government intends to bring forward a Bill that takes the easy option of simply legislating for open adoption in the future, that will not help anybody. There were 112 adoptions last year in Ireland but there are 60,000 people, like me, who were adopted in the past who do not have a right to their information. If the Minister simply brings forward a Bill that does something for people into the future, he will do an incredible disservice that would be very unfair to everybody who was adopted before that.
I appreciate that it is a sensitive issue and that it must be addressed carefully, but we are prepared to do that with the Minister. Other countries have legislated on this issue. The United Kingdom has had a system for 40 years whereby adoptees are entitled to the rights we are providing for in this Bill. There is precedent, therefore, and it is workable, but we must have the co-operation of the Minister to move the Bill forward.
I thank the Minister for attending the debate and for taking us to this point with the Bill. As the Minister said, the right to know one's identity and the right to privacy are two very important rights. In this Bill we believe we are achieving a workable balance that takes account of these two rights. The right to identity is a huge matter in a person's life and that is supported. Separately, however, we are respecting the right to privacy of a birth mother by providing that contact will only be made with her permission.
The right to identity is a solemn right and is essential for the individual. It includes the right to birth records and the Minister is aware of how important that is for one's medical history. However, contact only proceeds with the acknowledgement, interest and openness of the birth parent. From that point of view, this is a carefully managed process. Currently, I have a plea on my desk from a birth mother for this legislation. She placed her child for adoption in 1986. She has gone to HSE West in Galway and sought to trace the child. The HSE sent her to me. She was told that the HSE did not have enough resources but that a Bill is going through the House that could expedite the matter. I have evidence from birth parents. They say we should give the children they placed for adoption the right to their identity so the child will take the next step, hopefully, and make contact with them. For every parent the Minister might doubt would want this, I bet he has three times that number who want it.
I have two adopted children. They are teenagers and I hope that when they wish to know their identity, their information would be available. I am sure many adopted parents feel the same. The way I explain this is that it is like a triad - there is the adopted child, a birth parent and an adoptive parent. Truly, at one level they are all in this together, but the adoptive parent is ultimately the bottom of the barrel, and I accept that. The primary need is not mine, but one does want one's child, the young adopted person, to be happy. One knows that need for identity is basic and solemn. It is elementary to everything about the child, and one cannot rob them of that. Although we have handled this very carefully in terms of the constitutional advice, I would go so far as to say the right to identity is primary.
If we intend to work together on this issue, I urge the Minister to take up the offer made by Senator Averil Power, namely, that outside of this House we should meet the Minister's officials to deal with the legal and constitutional advice we have and make this a Bill we can all approve of and enact in the House.
An enormous amount of thought and preparation has gone into the Bill and the amendments. I particularly support this amendment. There appears to be an appropriate balance between competing rights - the right of an individual human being to determine and assert his or her identity, on the one hand, and, on the other, the right of the parent to privacy. I believe that balance has been achieved.
With regard to the question of this Bill being compared to a possible hypothetical Bill that is not yet in existence in the Department, I refer to the words spoken in the Dáil by Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, now Minister for Justice and Equality. Perhaps this has been done already today, but they have been quoted to me in a variety of correspondence. The Minister will see in my hand the amount of correspondence I have received from people on this issue in the past two days.
It is a real issue. It affects many people throughout the country. It is particularly powerful to hear the voices of people like Senator Averil Power who speak from direct personal experience. No one can turn their ears against this.
The Minister, Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, said in the Dáil in April 1997, which is a long time ago:
It is universally accepted that denial of access to information about one's origins is denial of a basic human right. That right is enshrined in the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child, and our own constitutional review group has recommended that Article 41 of the Constitution should be amended to make it abundantly clear that Ireland unequivocally subscribes to that view.
That was nearly 20 years ago. The now Minister for Justice and Equality made a very powerful contribution as a member of the Opposition in the Dáil.
There are two other things I would like to mention. Mothers very often do not look to have the information secreted. I have received a number of letters and e-mails from people. One of them states: "When I signed adoption papers I did so under coercion. I never asked for, nor was I offered, confidentiality." I am supportive of the adoptees having information about their natural parents and their birth identity after they turn 18 years of age. This information should be provided in a way that is sensitive to the needs of the adoptive person and their natural parents. I believe this amendment resolves that situation.
I wish to read another e-mail. I am not quite sure from what part of the country it came but it states, "Imagine sitting in a room in Dublin with a series of locked filing cabinets and somebody who is not directly connected or associated with me at all sitting in judgment and deciding whether or not I am entitled to the information about me contained in those filing cabinets." That is the kind of thing that would make a difference. Another piece of correspondence came from a 61 year old grandmother who was wondering from where she came and has still not got access to the information.
I have a series of people who have made inquiries for medical reasons, have been put on lists and still have not got anywhere. These are all issues which have to be confronted directly and I congratulate my three colleagues on putting this Bill forward. I strongly support it and hope it passes. I hope there is no vote and that the Government accepts it.
The Minister has already acknowledged to the House that he is not opposing the amendment, rather he has reservations. I am not sure if he wants to make a comment.
I thank Senators for their contributions. I reiterate that we want to do everything we can to ensure the process which is very onerous is very much simplified. I also reassure Senator Averil Power in particular that the Bill we are preparing is not only about prospective adoptions but also about current adoptions and the people who are in the situation the Senator so eloquently described. It would be wrong of me to ignore the situation.
Many people have referred to I.O'T. v. B. I will read directly from the advice. It noted that the decision of I.O'T. v. B. was not in fact about an adopted person but about two informal or de facto adopted people who remained at law the children of the birth mothers. The Chief Justice had pointed out in his judgment that he did not consider that the applicants were in the same legal position as adopted children. As detailed on page two of that opinion, Mr. Justice Hamilton pointed out that the effect of an adoption order is that all parental rights and duties of the natural parent are ended while the child becomes a member of the family of the adoptive parents as if he or she had been their natural child.
I refer to that for clarity. The Government wants to do everything it can in this situation and will be advised and interpret, in the widest way it can, the situation in order to facilitate people. We have the adoption contact preference register and we will propose that it become much more proactive, rather than the current situation where people have to wait for somebody else to register on it. The mothers whose children were adopted in the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s have not come forward, even if only to provide important medical information to the children they had to give up, in the numbers for which we had hoped.
I encourage those mothers to consider making contact with Tusla or the Adoption Authority of Ireland where they will be afforded confidentiality, care and empathy. It is to be hoped they will feel able to assist their birth children in finding out from where they came. To date, however, only 3,000 of the 11,000 people on the register are mothers. Today is another opportunity for us to highlight this register and the facility available.
I will not oppose the amendment. I am anxious to improve the legal basis for access to adoption records, but my proposals to Government will have to reflect the constraints on the Legislature in providing such access if they are not to fall foul of constitutional challenge. The Office of the Attorney General has provided comprehensive legal advice to my Department that has assisted in identifying the constitutional parameters within which the heads of the Bill have to be drafted. It is on the basis of that legal advice that there is a need to take into consideration the constitutional right to privacy of the birth mother in the situation of adoption.
For further reassurance, the Bill is being actively progressed and I hope to bring it to the Government in April.
I thank the Minister. I very much appreciate the spirit in which he has come into the House in not opposing the Bill today. As Senators Averil Power and Fidelma Healy Eames said, I would hope that we could move this Bill forward because people are ageing. This is an issue to which I first came when I started working in the Children's Rights Alliance and people, including mothers and those who were now adults and were seeking their identity, came forward to me on the issue.
The Minister referred to the numbers coming forward on the register. I have spoken to people who have told me that the difficulty is that they go forward to the register with an open wound, not knowing that they can be healed, because they have to wait and hope that the other side comes forward. The Bill we are proposing involves being proactive. We are telling people if they come forward, we will seek to find the information and to work as best as anybody can. I do not think I would go forward if I knew that all I would be doing is lodging my name. I would encourage people to go forward, but I am trying to explain from where people are coming.
We can go back and forth on the constitutional argument. It is absolutely clear that we do not agree. The judgment in I.O'T. v. B. pointed out that the right to privacy does not automatically trump the right to identity. We are trying to balance that. The Supreme Court decided that the two rights must be balanced against each other. For example, the Supreme Court decisions in Tuohy v. Courtney said that the precise balance to be struck is a matter for the Oireachtas to determine. We believe this Bill achieves this balance in a way that is sensitive to the needs of all parties. We are trying to strike the balance that has been mooted by the Supreme Court and longed for by so many adopted people, their families and their friends. That is what we are trying to do.
Senator Averil Power mentioned that many records were available. Genealogy and family history are hobbies of mine. I have worked with friends and others who have found their mothers were adopted.
If a person has an unusual surname, it is likely that he or she can trace the information after becoming adept at using the records. If the person has a name that is not as unusual as van Turnhout - it might be slightly unusual whereas Power is not as much - it makes tracing more difficult. It is fundamentally wrong that one's surname gives one the right to one's identity. This is an issue for me. We must balance rights and I am a strong believer in the right to identity. We will discuss the Children and Family Relationships Bill 2015. It is a matter of a child's best interests and voice. The child's right to an identity is at the core. I will defend and champion that right. We are trying to remedy the situation via the Bill in order that those 50,000 to 60,000 people see that there is some hope if they wish to choose to get their right to an identity. The deep yearning that I see in people is not something that can be made to wait. People are getting older. In the case of Philomena Lee it was slightly unusual, in that it was her son who died, but both had been seeking each other. They were denied that information. We are trying to provide such information through this amendment. I appreciate that the Minister and I can go back and forth, but it strikes the balance being sought by the courts.
I will be brief, as we want to get through all of the amendments today. I will pick up the Minister's point on the I. O'T v. B case. According to him, the court had acknowledged that the current legislative position as opposed to constitutional position was that, on the making of an adoption order, the link between the birth mother and child was severed. While that is true, that is the legislative position under the Adoption Act. When I. O'T v. B case was decided, there was no legislation on the adoptee's right to an identity as we are proposing now. Any future Supreme Court decision will be made in light of this Bill once passed. The situation that the Minister mentioned was established by legislation, not the Constitution, and can therefore be changed by legislation like that we are proposing.
I will address the judgment briefly. The Minister stated all duties of the natural parents were ended on the adoption placement. I remember the day of the adoption order in my first child's case. It was explained to us as a couple. I thought to myself that I would be naive in the extreme if I believed that a child's basic need to know his or her backstory - as Senator Jillian van Turnhout mentioned, it becomes a deep yearning as the child gets older - ended on that day. It is not like that. Just because a child is placed with a fine family does not mean he or she will not wonder why he or she was placed for adoption or given up. These questions must be answered directly at some stage.
We have been careful in the balancing of rights in this amendment. The courts have stated clearly that this is a matter for the Oireachtas to determine. Why do we not do it together? The process is carefully managed, that being, the right to basic information as on the birth certificate followed by managed contact, if that is the wish of the birth mother, and some counselling. This would be so much better than, for example, Senator Jillian van Turnhout or myself finding out only because we have unusual names. That would be far from a managed process. Indeed, it would be very dangerous and could hurt many people. That the Adoption Authority of Ireland would take over the process and assist people on their journeys would give a sense of relief to the adopted person or the natural mother. People deserve this.
Approximately 30 minutes ago, the Minister agreed not to oppose this amendment. I understand it is an important issue.
It is substantive.
I appreciate that.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 3, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 4
Amendments Nos. 9 and 18 are related and may be discussed together, by agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed.
I move amendment No. 9:
In page 8, between lines 29 and 30, to insert the following:
"(c) a body of persons or society that was, at any time, an "accredited body" as defined by section 10 of the Act of 2010 or that was, at any time, a body of persons or society registered in the Adoption Societies Register maintained under section 35 of the Adoption Act 1952;".
This amendment is to clarify that formerly accredited bodies and adoption societies can be also required to give information under section 4. Admittedly, this may not be of much use if the body has closed down or been destroyed or has destroyed or transferred its records, but it may be worth including in case such bodies still exist but are not currently accredited or they know where records have been stored. Did we not see this in the Philomena Lee case with Sean Ross Abbey? The records were there but their existence was denied. This is a critical matter. We are discussing very old people. The records are sacrosanct - they are those people's birth stories. We will do the State an incredible service by collecting them, storing them in one place and pursuing every society or registered body that had the right to carry out adoptions at any time in our history.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 4, as amended, agreed to.
NEW SECTION
I move amendment No. 10:
In page 9, between lines 6 and 7, to insert the following:
"Duty to notify the Adoption Authority of certain matters
5. (1) In this section--
"a person to whom this section applies” means any natural person who has information, whether in writing, stored electronically or otherwise (including information known to the person but not recorded in any durable medium) relating to the birth, placement for adoption, procurement of an adoption, or adoption of one or more adopted persons and includes, but is not limited to, any person who was employed by, was an agent of or worked for or on behalf of the Child and Family Agency, the Health Service Executive, or for or on behalf of any body or person that is or was an accredited body as defined by section 3 of the Act of 2010 or a body registered in the Adoption Societies Register maintained under section 35 of the Adoption Act 1952. This section shall not apply to information held by an adopted person or by the natural parent of an adopted person insofar as that information relates specifically to that adopted person;
"the Authority" means the Adoption Authority.
(2) Where a person to whom this section applies--
(a) has information that he or she knows or believes might be of material assistance to the Adoption Authority, an adopted person or natural parent in determining the identity and whereabouts of an adopted person, natural parent, or both, or
(b) knows or believes that any personal data relating to an adopted person, a natural parent, or both, and held by a body or person to which section 4(1) applies, is not a correct or true record of the circumstances or facts therein recorded,
it shall be the positive duty of such person to notify the Authority of the true facts and circumstances known to that person and to give to the Authority such information as is available to or known to that person.
(3) Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (2), where a person to whom this section applies knows or believes that the age, date of birth or address of a natural parent, adopted person or adoptive parent has been recorded incorrectly, whether deliberately, negligently or inadvertently, in any records held by any body or person to which section 4(1) applies, the person shall notify the Authority of the true facts and circumstances known to that person and shall give to the Authority such information as is available to or known to that person.
(4) Where a person to whom this section applies provides information to the Authority under this section, the Authority shall--
(a) produce a memorandum setting out the information provided to it,
(b) include the memorandum in any file held by the Authority relating to the adopted person to whom the information relates and in any file held by the Authority relating to the natural parent or parents and adoptive parent or parents of that adopted person, and
(c) require that any body or person to whom section 4(1) applies shall include a copy of the memorandum in any file held by that body or person relating to the adopted person to whom the information relates and in any file held by that body or person relating to the natural parent or parents and adoptive parent or parents of that adopted person.
(5) Where a natural parent of an adopted person knows or believes that any personal data relating to an adopted person, a natural parent, or both, and held by a body or person to which section 4(1) applies, is not a correct or true record of the circumstances or facts therein recorded, the natural parent may notify the Authority of the true facts and circumstances known to him or her and give to the Authority such information as is available to or known to him or her.
(6) For the purpose of subsection (5), a natural parent shall be entitled to consult such information as is held by a body or person to which section 4(1) applies as relates to the adoption of the natural parent’s adopted child, provided that the contact details of the adopted person and personal data that identifies the adopted person shall not be made available to the natural parent otherwise than in compliance with Part 3 of this Act.".
This amendment is designed to address the concern that some information on files held by various agencies and the Adoption Authority of Ireland may be incorrect or contain false information. This concern has been raised with me by adoptees and natural mothers who, having gained access to their files, have discovered that some of the information is inaccurate, for example, the age, date of birth or address of the natural parent at the time of the adoption. Some people have found that, after pointing out such inaccuracies to the bodies concerned, the information was not corrected. This point has been also made to me by the Adoption Rights Alliance and Adoption Loss.
Under the amendment, once an inaccuracy has been brought to the attention of the adoption agency, the Adoption Authority of Ireland or another relevant body, it will be required to add a memorandum to the relevant records. The amendment also places a positive duty on those who know or believe information to be incorrect, including staff members of adoption agencies, to inform the Adoption Authority of Ireland in order that it can add a memorandum to the relevant records. It does not place a positive duty on an adoptee or natural mother. However, it allows a natural mother who has concerns about the accuracy of information on her file to inspect the file and, upon finding an inaccuracy, insist that a memorandum be added to it.
Amendment agreed to.
SECTION 5
I move amendment No. 11:
In page 9, line 32, after "relations" to insert the following:
"and protect, as a right, access for adopted persons to their birth family’s relevant medical history".
This is my first contribution on the Bill, as Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh took the earlier Stages, but I wanted to commend the Senators who have introduced it. I will speak to the amendment. The Bill's authors have discussed it with me. I will listen to the Minister's response. We may withdraw the amendment and resubmit it on Report Stage if he is not of a mind to accept it now.
Knowing one's medical history is an important factor in making many life decisions.
It can have an effect when someone is deciding whether to have children or whether to undergo an operation, and in general behaviour relating to diet and exercise. Knowing one has an inherited genetic condition might affect one's decision on whether to have a child, or whether to have one with someone who is a genetic carrier for certain conditions. Certain genetic conditions might affect how someone leads his or her life. There is increased clustering of many diseases in families, which might lead to additional screening and even surgery if an adoptee is made aware of this. Adoptees may not be aware of increased risks due to a family history of cardiovascular disease. It is important that they are aware so that they can decide to change their behaviour. This information is relevant to that. "Relevant" is included as it would mean that any history relevant to the adoptee would be given. I appreciate that all of these issues are complex, but it is a serious matter that we need to give consideration to. That is the purpose of the amendment, and I will listen intently to the Minister's response.
I thank Senator David Cullinane for moving this amendment and welcome the motivation behind it. The amendment proposes that the Adoption Authority of Ireland would be obliged to take reasonable steps to "protect, as a right, access for adopted persons to their birth family’s relevant medical history". It is not clear from the amendment whether the Senator intends simply to place responsibility on the authority to reveal to the adoptee any information on the adoptee's medical history it already has on file. Certainly, if that is all that is intended, I absolutely agree with that. We would hope that this is already covered by the Bill but we would be very happy to make it explicit because it is extremely important. However, the amendment as currently drafted could also require the authority to actively seek information in addition to information it has on file. The Bill already proposes that family members would be encouraged to share such information but it does not require the authority to actively take steps to acquire information that is not volunteered by a natural parent. To do so would be problematic. As I understand it, no person has a right to access the medical history of another, including an adult family member, without their consent. Non-adoptees have no right to seek their mother's medical history or records without her permission. In fact, the Medical Council guidelines state:
While the concern of the patient's relatives and close friends is understandable, you must not disclose information to anyone without the patient’s consent. If the patient does not consent to disclosure, you should respect this except where failure to disclose would put others at risk of serious harm.
I understand the motivation behind the amendment and also appreciate the importance of adoptees having access to as much information as possible on their medical history. It was something I found particularly difficult. Every time you go to a doctor and are asked if there a history of serious illness in the family, you have to say you do not know. Every time you say that, you get anxious and upset because you know that there could be something. From a woman's point of view, perhaps your mother passed away very early from breast cancer. Perhaps some other genetic illness runs in the family but you simply do not know this. Not having that information is at best distressing but at worst, if there is a very serious genetic illness, people's lives are being put at risk because they do not have the information they need to take steps against it and to seek treatment at an early stage. This is a crucial area and we would like to ensure that we can secure within the Bill as much information as legally possible.
Our legal adviser has expressed concerns about the precise wording of this amendment. Therefore, we propose that Senators Jillian van Turnhout and Fidelma Healy Eames and I meet Senator David Cullinane and his team before Report Stage to discuss this issue. We would be happy to ask our legal advisor to take on board the spirit of where Senator David Cullinane is coming from and ensure we provide for the strongest possible right to medical information that we can and agree a wording before the Bill comes back on Report Stage. Senator David Cullinane has flagged a very important issue, which I welcome.
I congratulate Senators Averil Power, Jillian van Turnhout and Fidelma Healy Eames on progressing this very important Bill to where it is today. Many of my colleagues have mentioned genetic issues, how important our medical history is and the right to know it. I appreciate and recognise the difficulties for some mothers. Some might want their right to privacy and to remain anonymous and this has been the practice in some instances in the past. However, I believe every household in the country has a great interest in this Bill. The right to know who you are is a basic human right. This has been said by some of my colleagues and I believe it is a human right. Everybody has a heritage and a family tree. Everybody is entitled to go back and trace their family tree. There might be some adoptees who do not wish to trace their family roots for whatever reason. That is their right.
It is time to change the law, which was changed in other countries such as Great Britain 40 or 50 years ago. I read recently about a 71 year old man meeting his 79 year old sister for the first time. What a wonderful achievement and how must they have felt after such a long period living in different parts of the world. It is necessary to bring in the legislation, which is long overdue and is the way forward in 2015. I welcome this legislation and congratulate my colleagues whom I have already named.
I again thank the Senators for bringing forward this Bill, which is long overdue. I hope it will not be too long before it is introduced properly. The amendment proposes to insert "and protect, as a right, access for adopted persons to their birth family’s relevant medical history" after "relations" on page 9, line 32. Much of the time, medical history does not even arise until well after the child has been adopted. If a biological parent has a heart condition, it may not show up for many years. As medical history will not show up on a birth certificate, it is about revealing the identity of the biological parent so that the adopted person can have the relevant conversations and find out the medical history. If we put this in, I do not know how it would work and how it would be monitored. Where does one get the medical history from at the time of adoption? Do we say "Have your parents a medical history?" Are we looking for the grandparents? I know how Senator Power feels because my father was adopted and our medical history on our father's side was never available to us because we never knew about it. To be honest, he was one of the people who did not even want to speak about it. He would never talk to us about being adopted or about his background. He knew his mother but he did not know his biological father. I would be interested in hearing what the Minister has to say about this. Being a GP, I am sure he will have a lot to say about medical history.
I already contributed on Second Stage.
I caused a bit of a flurry when I raised questions about information being imparted to children at a particular age. I have moved beyond that and overwhelmingly support all aspects of this Bill with regard to the right of adopted persons to know as early as possible their origins and their identity.
On this amendment, I have read the original proposal in section 5(3)(e) to which Senator Cullinane is adding his proposed amendment, which would strengthen the Bill. As the Senator Marie Moloney said, the Minister, being a general practitioner, will have a view on this but, to me, it seems fundamental. Having regard to there being some 60,000 adoptees in this country, we may be talking about a long lead-in period in this respect. A significant number of that 60,000 are of a particular age and perhaps of an age where their medical history would be essential and such information very helpful because of declining health. I know my family background and it seems horrendous that an adopted person who would go to their general practitioner for an initial diagnosis would not have that basic building block in place in order that their general practitioner could make an honest and accurate assessment of the medical condition of their patient. I am sure the Minister will have a view on that matter but I suggest this would be an essential building block in terms of his legislative proposals. It does not bear thinking about that an adopted person as they get older - they could require this information at any time and I am not referring to any age limit - would not have that vital information about their family history. It becomes more relevant the older the adopted person gets and the more likely they would have to visit a GP or access hospital for health reasons. As a medical doctor, the Minister will be able to clarify this but, as a non-medical person, my understanding is that there are genetic dimensions to certain diseases and certain health conditions such as heart disease and cancer which seem to move on in particular families where there is a history of it. I will rest the case there. I support the overall thrust of what is being attempted to be achieved here and I particularly support the amendment.
I thought it was implicit in the Bill that the birth family's relevant medical history would be passed on. Senator David Cullinane might clarify if, in his amendment, he means information over and above what is provided at the time of placement.
As Senator Marie Moloney said, by and large, most birth mothers would be quite healthy because they are young. The medical history one gets at that point is more like the grandparents' medical history, which is fine. The people concerned are probably in their 40s or 50s. I know about this because I have been a receiver of such information. There can be quite a pattern of heart disease coming down through the genes, as Senator Pashcal Mooney said, which is something to watch out for, or there can be respiratory problems, alerting one to be mindful not to smoke. It is very good. I wonder if what is being sought in this amendment is over and above that information because the making available of that information is good practice. The passing on of that information has been the practice here for more than 20 years.
More than 20 years.
My experience is that since the mid-1990s, and probably since the early 1990s, this type of information has been sought from the birth mother when the child is being placed for adoption. However, the birth father's medical history would not necessarily be on record, but half a loaf is better than no bread.
In regard to medical records, they are the property of the individual and not open in terms of their being taken forcefully, as Senator Averil Power said, but if they are volunteered, that is what is intended.
Is Senator's David Cullinane pressing his amendment?
I will withdraw the amendment and may bring it forward on Report Stage.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendments Nos. 12 and 19 are related and may be discussed together, by agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed.
I move amendment No. 12:
In page 11, between lines 19 and 20, to insert the following:
“(11) Where an adopted person wishes to communicate in writing with his or her natural parent or where a natural parent wishes to communicate in writing with the adopted person, the Authority shall make arrangements for the exchange of such communications, provided that in making such arrangements for the specific purpose of this subsection, the Authority shall not release to either the adopted person or the natural parent any information other than that which the writer of the communication has included in the communication.
(12) For the purpose of subsection (11), a communication may include medical information or a request for medical information relating to the adopted person, natural parent or relatives of the natural parent.”.
These amendments are designed to allow letters to be exchanged between the natural parent and the adopted person and to allow medical information to be shared. This would fit into the process where the adoptee on making the initial application for their birth certificate may also provide the Adoption Authority with a letter that they would like to have passed on to their natural mother. The same would also be the case where a natural parent is seeking the adoption certificate of their adopted son or daughter and they may also include a letter at that point, if they wish, and the natural parent may also decide to give over medical information. The purpose of this proposal is that from the natural mother's perspective, if they receive a request for the birth certificate or are told that the birth certificate has been requested by their adopted son or daughter, they might take some comfort in also receiving a letter from their son or daughter indicating their wishes or just setting out why they are looking for this information and having the opportunity to reach out and for the adopted son or daughter to explain where they are coming from. The may write a letter along the following lines:
I appreciate that I was adopted at a time when most children were, that this was probably a difficult time for you. I do not wish to impose myself on your life or to create any further complications but I am looking for this information because my identify is important to me, but I also want to progress the matter in a way that is sensitive to your needs as well.
From my experience of being an adoptee, I was very anxious to say this to my mother to reassure her that I would never want to do anything that would upset her and that I appreciated that even talking about adoption or even considering the circumstances of my birth could be difficult for her. From talking to other adoptees, many of them share the same anxiety and want to reassure their mother that they are looking for this information because it is important to them, but they also want to reassure them that they are not seeking to make their life difficult. They appreciate that there is a possibility that their mother may not have told her spouse yet or that she may have other children she has not told and they only want to progress the issue in a way that is sensitive and would give their mother space to deal with it as well. The opportunity to provide a letter would be helpful in that respect.
Thee amendments also provide that where the mother has decided that she would prefer not to have contact and not to have her contact details released, she may opt to provide up-to-date medical information and, therefore, provide additional information on top of what the Adoption Authority of Ireland has provided. It is implicitly stated that this would be an option and that the Adoption Authority of Ireland, in communicating with the mother, would advise her that she has the option of contact or no contact, in which case it would not pass on her contact details, but that she also has the option to give it medical information that it can pass on to her son or daughter. These proposals seek to make the process as sensitive and supportive as possible for both parties. It moves forward in the spirit of the Bill, which is to enable people to move forward in a way that suits their own individual needs and sensitives and it facilitates this.
This is a very positive amendment. It proposes a very healthy approach. It provides for a gentle lead-in to a potential meeting in time. It is unintrusive. It is an opportunity for the young adopted person to say to the birth parent that they respect their privacy. Equally it is an opportunity for the birth parent, who may be reaching out to the adopted young person, to say the same to them. The main thing is that it is providing for the respecting of each other's space without being in each other's face.
It is a process of reaching out, providing information and, maybe, asking for help. Health boards have been doing this for some time now on behalf of birth parents and adoptive families. In our case, we passed on progress reports and photographs for many years. The health boards facilitated this. We are now seeking that it be a function of the Adoption Authority of Ireland. As I said, there is nothing unusual about this.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 5, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 6
Amendments Nos. 13 to 15, inclusive, and 24 are related and will be taken together.
I move amendment No. 13:
In page 12, line 7, after "address" to insert "(other than an address listed for a natural parent in the relevant entry in the register of births)".
The purpose of these amendments is to bring clarity to the Bill. Amendment No. 15 seeks to ensure access to information on a birth certificate. The amendments are technical in nature but would, we believe, add clarity to the Bill. I understand the Minister is not opposing these amendments. Perhaps he might indicate at some stage if he proposes to engage further with us between now and Report Stage. I understand it is proposed to take Report Stage today if the Bill progresses unopposed. It would be useful for us to know whether there will be further engagement with us on the Bill.
If the Minister intends to bring forward Report Stage amendments and would like the time to do so, we would be supportive of Report Stage being scheduled for another day. There are no Government amendments tabled today and if the Minister does not propose to bring forward any on Report Stage, then we should take it today. The issue raised by Sinn Féin in respect of medical information could be addressed by the Dáil. I will speak to the Fianna Fáil spokesperson to ensure that is the case.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 14:
In page 12, line 8, to delete "or a" and substitute "and a".
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 15:
In page 12, between lines 11 and 12, to insert the following:
"(5) For the avoidance of any doubt, nothing in this section shall prevent the release to a person under section 4 of any particulars contained in an entry in respect of that person in the register of births.".
Amendment agreed to.
Section 6, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 7
Amendments Nos. 16 and 17 are related and will be discussed together.
I move amendment No. 16:
In page 12, lines 19 and 20, to delete "adoptive parents" and substitute "adoptive family".
We have engaged with a number of people on the Bill. The reality is that many of the adopted children about whom we are speaking are now adults. Therefore, we believe a reference to "adoptive family" rather than "adoptive parents" is more appropriate.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 17:
In page 12, line 26, to delete "adoptive parents" and substitute "adoptive family".
Amendment agreed to.
Section 7, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 8
I move amendment No. 18:
In page 13, between lines 18 and 19, to insert the following:
"(d) a body of persons or society that was, at any time, an "accredited body" as defined by section 10 of the Act of 2010 or that was, at any time, a body of persons or society registered in the Adoption Societies Register maintained under section 35 of the Adoption Act 1952,".
Amendment agreed to.
Section 8, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 9
I move amendment No. 19:
In page 16, between lines 9 and 10, to insert the following:
"(9) Where an adopted person wishes to communicate in writing with his or her natural parent or where a natural parent wishes to communicate in writing with the adopted person, the Authority shall make arrangements for the exchange of such communications, provided that in making such arrangements for the specific purpose of this subsection, the Authority shall not release to either the adopted person or the natural parent any information other than that which the writer of the communication has included in the communication.
(10) For the purpose of subsection (9), a communication may include medical information or a request for medical information relating to the adopted person, natural parent or relatives of the natural parent.".
Amendment agreed to.
Section 9, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 10
I move amendment No. 20:
In page 16, line 24, to delete "data" and substitute "data held in respect of the adopted person".
The purpose of this amendment is to correct a typographical error.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendments Nos. 21 to 23, inclusive, are related and will be discussed together by agreement.
I move amendment No. 21:
In page 16, line 33, to delete "adopted person" and substitute "natural parent".
The purpose of this amendment is to correct a typographical error on our part.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 22:
In page 16, line 35, to delete "adopted person" and substitute "natural parent".
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 23:
In page 16, line 36, to delete "adopted person" and substitute "natural parent".
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 24:
In page 17, line 4, to delete "or a" and substitute "and a".
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 25:
In page 17, line 5, to delete "identity." and substitute the following:
"identity, but otherwise shall not include personal data that would allow the natural parent to identify the adopted person without making contact with him or her unless the adopted person has indicated in accordance with this Act that he or she does not wish to be identified to the natural parent.".
The Bill provides the adoptee with a choice between release of his or her adoption certificate and the provision of his or her contact details to the natural parent where the natural parent is seeking the information. We believe the adoptee should have a third choice, namely, whether the full adoption certificate, including the names and addresses at the time of the adoption of their adoptive parents, are to be given.
The adoptee should have a choice regarding release of his or her current contact details and whether this information should be redacted on the adoption certificate. As I explained on Second Stage, this approach is different from that taken in respect of the birth certificate as provided for in the Bill in that an adoptee would be able to access their birth certificate, including the address of the natural parents at the time of the adoption. The reason for this is that the adoptee has a clear right to his or her identity, which right can be then balanced against the privacy right of the natural parent. When it comes to natural parents seeking information about their adopted son or daughter natural parents do not have an identity right per se that entitles them to have information about their son or daughter, whereas on the other hand the adoptee does have a right to privacy. The balance is different. It is for this reason the Bill provides, on the basis of legal advice we have received, that the adoptee may decide that he or she is not happy, not only to have his or her contact details released but to not have the adoption certificate in its entirety released. Acceptance of this amendment would ensure the adoptee has a choice in regard to what best suits his or her individual needs and sensitivities.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 26:
In page 17, between lines 5 and 6, to insert the following:
"(5) In this section "contact details" do not include any such particulars as are contained in an entry in the register of adoptions in respect of an adopted person, unless the adopted person has indicated in accordance with this Act that he or she does not wish to be identified to the natural parent, in which case subsection (2) applies.".
This amendment also deals with the adoption certificate and the adoptee's ability to have some of the information on it redacted.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 10, as amended, agreed to.
Sections 11 to 15, inclusive, agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported with amendments.
When is it proposed to take Report Stage?
Unless the Minister proposes to bring forward amendments on Report Stage, we should take it now as scheduled.
Bill received for final consideration.
Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."
I thank Senators on all sides of the House who have worked with us on bringing this legislation forward. I sincerely appreciate it, both politically and personally. It is an issue that matters immensely to me. I am an adoptee and have been fortunate enough to find my natural mother, half siblings and family. The Bill will not make any difference to me for that reason but it is such a privilege to be in a position to help other adoptees who have not been as fortunate and also the many natural mothers and some fathers who have been in contact with me urging us to bring forward this legislation. This Bill has the potential to make a massive difference to people's lives at no cost to the State and finally to give people some closure, some peace in their hearts and, for those who wish to do so, the ability to reconnect. I refer to people who were forced apart through forced adoptions in this country, where women had no choice whatsoever. They have been plagued by the hurt and pain of this for far too long.
We have done something fantastic today. From the bottom of my heart I thank the Members on all sides of the House who have contributed to this debate. I thank the many people who sent us correspondence. Senator David Norris pointed out the pile of e-mails and letters we have all received on this matter, even in the past few days. This is an issue that really does touch every family in the country in one way or another. It is an issue of profound importance and I thank everybody who has worked with us on this.
I urge the Minister to progress the Bill through the Dáil. All Stages have been passed in the Seanad. The Minister is still talking about the heads of another Bill but now has one that has the assent of this House and cross-party support. Nobody, at any stage of this debate, has spoken against it, which is quite remarkable. I am not sure I have attended any other Seanad debate in the past four years in which there has not been a single voice against the legislation under discussion.
The Minister now has the opportunity to proceed with this Bill in the Dáil and he will have control over it. He may table amendments in the other House to address any concerns he has. I will certainly be asking spokespersons about this. We will be looking to other groups also, not just the Fianna Fáil group. We will be asking all parties and Independents in the Dáil to work with the Minister on the legislation so it can proceed through that House in the same cross-party spirit in which it has been passed in this House. The Bill is now with the Minister and I ask him to please listen to the voices of adopted people, natural mothers and natural fathers who are looking to him to address this issue and finally be the Minister who will bring this through and give them some peace. He should please listen to them and go as far as he can with this Bill. It has just been passed in the Seanad and now only needs to be got through the Dáil. The Minister should please show the leadership and courage required to bring it through.
I, too, welcome the Minister to the House. This is a very good day for politics in the country and certainly a very good day for the Seanad. I have always believed that when legislation that makes sense is proposed by anybody in the House, is the right thing to do and makes a difference to the citizens we represent, we all have a responsibility to engage with it in a mature fashion. Those who have listened to Senator Averil Power's personal testimony about the journey she has travelled could not be but moved by it, and also by the passion, belief and integrity with which she has articulated her story. During a local radio interview, I was asked recently to identify somebody on the Opposition benches that I most admired. Without hesitation, I said Senator Averil Power because she is what I would describe as a total breath of fresh air in politics. I join her in asking the Minister to progress this legislation through the Dáil. The only House we can answer for, however, is the Seanad. We can only hope the Dáil will do the right thing. The Seanad has done so today.
I wish the legislation well in Dáil Éireann. I sincerely hope it receives the same enthusiastic response there that it has received here. I commend Senator Averil Power for bringing the legislation forward. Doing so is what we are here for. We are here to do the right thing for the people. The legislation will assist the thousands of people who do not know who their natural parents are. That is what we are here for and that is what we have done.
I congratulate the three Senators on the work they have put into this Bill. Even during Second and Committee Stages, considerable work was done to strengthen it and address any flaws. Well done to the Senators. I thank the Minister for accepting the Bill and I thank his officials for the time they have put into it. This is the second day in a row in which we have passed legislation in this House that will have a profound effect on people's lives. Sometimes the legislation affects only a minority but we are here to represent the minority as well as the majority. Again, I congratulate the Senators on their work.
I thank everybody in the House for their co-operation. With only 60 Senators in the House, I have been very surprised by the number of personal stories from Members based on direct or family experience. These stories show how much the subject ripples throughout society. This is a really proud day for me. I thank Senator Averil Power, in particular, for all her work on the Bill. I thank also Senator Fidelma Healy Eames, Dr. Fergus Ryan and all the individuals who have come forward to tell their stories and bear witness, including the NGOs that have been advocating. The 50,000 to 60,000 voices are now being heard, certainly by Seanad Éireann. For me, this is a really proud day. Very often we talk about our past here, and this legislation is a way for us to provide a remedy. It is really powerful when we can let the light in, and it is good day for Seanad Éireann.
For me, it is important that we pass this Bill on to the Dáil. I hope it deals with it as efficiently and effectively as we have. The real proud day for me will be when this Bill or a similar one — I hope it will be this one — will come into operation and people can really vindicate their right to their identity so the yearning within them can in some way be addressed. We must keep pushing this agenda so the voices of the affected may be heard.
The Oireachtas has been doing a lot of spring cleaning in the area of family law. This is very good. The role of this House, in particular, is significant and important in this regard because this is a reflective Chamber. I spoke only once on this occasion. I said what I had to say and I sat and listened. I was greatly informed by what was said. I decided not to speak further because I believed it was important to pass the Bill and not hold it up with interminable, long-winded speeches.
This is a very good day for the Seanad but the Bill is only half way there. I join others in urging the Minister to progress the legislation because it is really only in the abstract until it becomes law. There is a very substantial body of work. The Minister may feel it needs to be tweaked in certain ways but he has the opportunity in the Lower House to do so. I look forward confidently to this legislation passing into law. I congratulate the three Senators who proposed the Bill.
This is a landmark day for the State; there is no doubt about it. As others have said, we are half way there. The Minister is the only person here today who belongs to the other House. We are now entrusting him with the Bill to take care of it in order that it will become law. Personally and politically, I am honoured to be a co-sponsor of the Bill. I thank Senators Averil Power and Jillian van Turnhout for this privilege. I am very grateful to all Members of this House for the sensitivity, care and attention they have demonstrated regarding this issue.
It is a landmark day for my family because I now have two young people who in a few years, once this Bill is enacted, will have the right to their birth information. At a personal level, I will be saying, "Get ready". Does the Minister understand what I am saying?
As there are approximately 50,000 adopted persons in communities, one could say approximately 250,000 people will be touched by this Bill. For many people adoption has made their families; therefore, we want it to be a healing process. We know that in the past, adoption was not always a healing process. There was a time when it was shrouded in shame. I am pleased to say that I do not believe that has been the case for the past 20 years. We have moved on immensely in that regard.
Many people are following this debate today, including on Twitter and Facebook, and are joining in this conversation with us. I ask the Minister to progress this Bill for what it is. I know he is planning another Bill and has heads in mind. There may be other aspects he will want to touch on in that Bill. We will look favourably on that, but do not halt this Bill.
I do not know if the Minister intends to sum up but I would be grateful if he could give us an indication of when this Bill might come before the Dáil and when it will be enacted into law. I thank the Minister for his time and sensitivity, and for accepting the Bill today.
Ceapaim féin gur lá an-stairiúil é seo do Seanad Éireann. Tá an Teachta Séamus Ó Dálaigh sa Seomra. Tá áthas orm é a fheiceáil sa Teach seo.
I will tell colleagues my story. I was adopted also, and I will never forget who adopted me. The Senators who proposed the Bill should be very proud and I encourage the Minister to do what he can to ensure this Bill has a successful passage through the Dáil. As has been said, it has been endorsed on all sides of this House. Not one negative word was spoken about it, and it has come to a successful conclusion. I am proud to have been part of it. My greatest wish is to ensure that the law in this country is changed and implemented as soon as possible. Comhghairdeas daoibh go léir.
I compliment Senators Averil Power, Jillian van Turnhout and Fidelma Healy Eames for all the work they put into this Bill. Like my learned colleague, Senator David Norris, I have listened to the debate and we have learned a great deal. For that we are very much indebted to the Senators.
I thank the Senators opposite, Senators Marie Moloney, Martin Conway and Terry Brennan, for their generosity of spirit. Sometimes those on the Opposition benches are meant to-----
Kill each other.
We would never consider you opposition.
-----make derogatory remarks and so on, but the friendships in this House surpass all of that. They have been so kind and generous in terms of the spirit of this legislation they deserve special thanks from everybody on this side.
I wish the Bill well and commend it to the Minister. It will make 50,000 or 60,000 people much happier, as we have heard. I compliment Dr. Fergus Ryan for the work he did. I knew him as a student and remember how kind he was in looking after old people on the campus of Trinity College Dublin.
The Bill is to be commended to a Minister who has gone out on a limb and faced very strong criticism from vested interests in his wish to protect children from the scourge of tobacco. He had the unanimous support of this House on that in terms of the plain packaging issue. We will support him because we are at one on that issue.
This is a suitable way to remember the historic events we will commemorate next year in that we are removing stigma from children and promoting the rights of natural mothers and fathers. We do cherish all the children of the national equally and protect their civil rights. If we have had advice which was very hard to bear from another troika, the Bill prepared by the troika here today is one we all support and wish well. I plead with the Minister to do the best he can to progress it through the Dáil because this is an important day, as Senators on his side of the House have said. I congratulate again the three promoting Senators and their advisers.
We replied from our office to vast amounts of e-mails and correspondence and all the people involved said they supported the Bill. This is a great day for this House.
Go raibh maith agaibh go leir. I particularly thank Senators Averil Power, Jillian van Turnhout and Fidelma Healy Eames for the time and effort they have put into developing the Private Members' Bill, and Dr. Fergus Ryan, the legal expert who provided assistance in the process. While I do not oppose the Bill I must reiterate that I still foresee some constitutional difficulties with it, but it must be remembered that there are many positive outcomes to adoption.
I note that Senator Averil Power, Deputy Anne Ferris and the Tánaiste, while recently highlighting the historic information and tracing dilemmas that the secrecy of Irish adoption led to, emphasised that they were brought up in a loving and nurturing environment. Senator Terry Brennan also said that earlier. The lifelong support of their adoptive parents in their search for information about their identity was a positive force.
The evidence provided to me by the Adoption Authority of Ireland indicates that mothers whose children were adopted in the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s have not come forward in the numbers we would like to see. I take the opportunity again to encourage them and make them aware of the register. I also encourage those mothers to consider making contact with the Child and Family Agency or the Adoption Authority of Ireland where they will be afforded confidentiality, care and empathy and where, I hope, they will feel able to assist their birth child in finding out where they came from. I again thank everybody involved.
Question put and agreed to.
When is it proposed to sit again?
Ar 10.30 maidin amárach.
The Seanad adjourned at 5.40 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 19 February 2015.