Priority Questions
1. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs if she considers the level of fees paid to guardians ad litem to represent children in court to be sustainable or appropriate in the current economic climate; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6951/14]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe Minister will be aware of a recent article by reputable journalists, for the second year in a row, confirming the legal fees paid by her Department, particularly the fees attracted by guardians ad litem. Does she consider the level of fees paid to guardians ad litem to represent children in court to be sustainable or appropriate in the current economic circumstances?
I believe there is a clear need to radically reform the basis on which the current arrangements operate. They have been operating in that way since 1991, when the guardian ad litem system was introduced by the then Government, without regulation or governance structures attached to the position. That is the genesis of the problems which I must deal with and reform.
In care proceedings under the Child Care Act 1991, a guardian ad litem may be appointed by a court. In accordance with the legislation, guardians ad litem are appointed where the court considers this necessary in the interests of the child and in the interests of justice. Such guardians play a very important role in making the views of the child or young person known to the court.
As I have previously indicated, I will bring forward legislative proposals to reform this area in the current year in collaboration with the Minister for Justice and Equality. My Department is very actively examining all aspects of service provision in this area with a view to the introduction of more regulated and sustainable provision which will address a range of issues, including payment arrangements. The examination is taking account of the potential key elements of a reformed service, which are not in place at present, such as the criteria for the engagement of guardians ad litem, their role and responsibilities, necessary qualifications for appointment and the basis for their remuneration.
As I said, there is a need to radically reform this area. It is a legacy issue which the Department is addressing in liaison with the Department of Justice and Equality. It is part of a comprehensive reform of the legal framework for children’s rights and services which is under way. This includes a number of areas in both public and private proceedings, because the role of guardians applies across both public and private law. Child welfare and protection are relevant in both areas and obviously the role of the guardian is required where decisions are to be made in respect of guardianship, custody and access.
That is part of the collaboration between the officials from my Department and the Department of Justice and Equality. There have been many meetings in this regard to develop the proposals which will form part of the legislation.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
It is envisaged that such a collaborative approach to devising reforms will be of common interest and benefit.
Other reforms which have already been initiated or completed as part of the wider programme of legal reform relating to children are also very relevant. These reforms include the establishment of the Child and Family Agency on 1 January last, the amendment to section 17 of the Child Care Act enacted in 2013 to address the frequency with which interim care orders need to be renewed, the introduction of national procedures relating to court practice by the Child and Family Agency, the examination being given by the Minister for Justice and Equality to the establishment of dedicated family courts and the referral of a draft general scheme and heads of Bill in respect of the child and family relationships Bill to the Oireachtas. This latter proposed legislation, which is being taken forward by the Minister for Justice and Equality, signals the proposed introduction of revised arrangements for guardians ad litem in respect of certain family law proceedings. As mentioned, this is an important context for the collaboration which is under way between both Departments.
With regard to existing guardian ad litem arrangements, under the Child Care Act 1991 the cost of guardian ad litem services fell to be paid by the Health Service Executive. The responsibility for such payments has now transferred to the Child and Family Agency with effect from its establishment on 1 January 2014. The agency does not procure or manage provision of these services in any normal sense since it is the courts which make such appointments and to whom guardians ad litem report. Indeed, given that a guardian ad litem may take a contrary view to that presented by the Child and Family Agency about a case, the agency would be respectful that it is the court that has determined the appointment of the guardian ad litem to act in an independent capacity in the interests of the child. The agency can, however, apply to the court to have the amount of a guardian ad litem's costs or expenses measured or taxed, although additional costs arise in respect of such a process. The existing limitations on the agency’s role in respect of guardian ad litem fees were clarified in a report by the Ombudsman in 2008 regarding the HSE’s handling of the issue.
Both child welfare and protection cases and private family law proceedings can raise issues of considerable complexity and sensitivity that have enormous implications for children. In child welfare and protection, regrettably, the intervention of the courts under the Child Care Acts must be sought on a regular basis - there were in excess of 7,400 full care orders and interim care orders sought in 2012. Guardians ad litem have an important role in many such cases. However, together with my colleague, the Minister for Justice and Equality, I aim to bring forward in the current year proposals for a revised guardian ad litem service that will be more consistent, equitable and economic than that which has persisted since provision was first made in the Child Care Act 1991.
I again welcome the Minister's commitment to introduce legislation. It is a commitment she has made on a number of occasions in the past three years.
The Minister is correct to suggest that guardians ad litem, GALs, often have the future welfare of the child in their hands and therefore they perform an extremely important role. Who is responsible for the vetting of GALs? Could the Minister confirm to the Dáil that all people currently practising as GALs are fully vetted and compliant? I have been told that not all people currently acting as GALs are fully vetted. This is an area of huge exposure from a child protection perspective. What qualifications are necessary for such appointments? Is it the case that I, the Minister or anyone in this House could go to a court and become a guardian ad litem?
It is important to recognise that total reform is needed in this area. There is a need for Garda vetting. Barnardos would confirm that all of the guardians ad litem working in its service are Garda vetted. There is no question of that, but there is a need for Garda vetting of GALs to be part of a system of regulation of GALs more generally. Instituting a new system to ensure systematic Garda vetting of GALs would require a joint approach involving the Garda central vetting unit, the Courts Service and the Presidents of the District Court and Circuit Court as well as the Department of Justice and Equality. I have been in contact with the Minister for Justice and Equality to clarify the situation and to progress the issue. Ultimately, it is part of bringing in legislation to regulate the appointment of GALs in terms of their qualifications. A separation of powers issue arises because it is the courts that appoint guardians ad litem.
The Minister confirmed that all GALs appointed by Barnardos are Garda vetted. Could she confirm that all GALs currently in the system who are working with vulnerable children are Garda vetted? Could she indicate “Yes” or “No”? If not all guardians ad litem working with vulnerable children are Garda vetted, does the Minister not think that is an area of serious concern? Such positions involve considerable exposure from a child protection perspective.
The Minister has yet to answer the question on the fees charged. One guardian ad litem was paid €317,000 in one year. Does the Minister consider such a fee is justifiable? At a time when we do not have sufficient social workers working with vulnerable children, when the youth work budget is being cut and so many cutbacks are being made in the Department, does the Minister consider it justifiable to pay €317,000 to one individual in legal fees from a budget of €31 million? The Minister cannot stand over that.
The question must be asked why the Fianna Fáil Government stood over such a system for the past 12 years. I am now in a position where I must reform and change it-----
The Minister promised to do that three years ago.
-----which is precisely what I am doing. It is clear that the system should have been reformed during the past 12 years. Like so many issues I am dealing with, I now have to introduce reform, examine the situation and make sure that every guardian ad litem who is appointed is vetted and that appropriate rates are paid. That is precisely what I am doing. The courts appoint individuals and Garda vetting is undertaken on behalf of organisations rather than at the request of private individuals. GALs may rely on Garda vetting done for them in other settings.
GALs are appointed by the courts and the courts decide on the person they appoint in particular circumstances. As regards the fees, I have already said that a change in fees must be part of the reform. I emphasise that in the reforms I am introducing, the key aim is to ensure that we have a functioning guardian ad litem system because it is an extremely important service for young children before the courts. In the legislation I introduced last year on interim care orders I ensured that the cost of guardians ad litem was reduced because they did not have to return to the courts frequently. I introduced legislation to ensure that it could be up to 28 days instead of having to go to court every week.
2. Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs the steps she is taking to address the dangers of the Neknomination Internet craze in view of the recent tragic consequences; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6694/14]
Amharc ar fhreagraI seek to engage with the Minister on the recently highlighted very serious and tragic deaths of young people connected to the social media and Internet craze of Neknomination.
I express my sincere sympathy to the families of all those who have been involved and the tragic outcome there has been for some families. The underlying problem we have to deal with is attitudes to alcohol. The Government is very concerned generally about the level of alcohol consumption among young people, but specifically about the recent tragic deaths involving young people participating in the Neknomination trend. Clearly this is a social media craze that started out in what was thought was an innocent way but has turned out to have lethal consequences. Peer pressure is a significant issue.
I was very impressed with the Union of Students in Ireland which initiated a proactive approach to informing, educating and interrupting this craze by the actions it took. Scouting Ireland and others got proactively involved in interrupting it and replacing it with something positive.
Much of the interaction is between adults rather than children. However, there can be lethal consequences. Clearly, the dangerous drink misuse in those circumstances has had very serious consequences. It does reflect on our cultural attitude to alcohol. The important point is that we must focus on information and education. There is a strong role for Government. That is why we have taken the issue of public health and attitudes to alcohol extremely seriously. The Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Alex White, is working on a public health (alcohol) Bill. Last October, the Irish Government approved an extensive package of measures to deal with alcohol misuse, including the drafting of the public health (alcohol) Bill. Those measures were agreed on foot of the recommendations in the steering group report on a national substance misuse strategy. The recommendations in the strategy are grouped under the five pillars of supply reduction, prevention, treatment, rehabilitation and research. We want to reduce alcohol consumption to the OECD average by 2020.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
The package of measures to be implemented will include provision for: minimum unit pricing for alcohol products; the regulation of advertising and marketing of alcohol; structural separation of alcohol from other products in mixed trading outlets; health labelling of alcohol products; and regulation of sports sponsorship. The general scheme of the Bill was approved in October. Work on developing a framework for the necessary Department of Health legislation is continuing.
I am conscious that the Neknomination trend has manifested itself through social media and, as a result, been disseminated much more widely and extensively. Contact has been made by my staff with the head of policy in Facebook to express my concern and that of the public with this trend. Facebook has said it addresses reported concerns regarding content on a case-by-case basis. I hope that these contacts and the reporting of such concerns will lead to a reflection among social media providers on the role they can play in limiting the dangers of these trends for the general public, and in particular children and young people.
We must be sensitive to the families of those young men who have lost their lives in what are tragic circumstances linked to Neknomination dares or challenges, whatever one may call them. I join with the Minister in expressing my deepest sympathy to the families and friends of those who have lost their lives. I do not wish to contribute to any hysteria surrounding this Internet craze or the use of social media. However, we must recognise what is happening. We must acknowledge that it is real and that this Internet craze is tapping into the culture and vulnerability of young people in particular. That is not to suggest that this applies uniquely to young people, as it does not.
A dangerous mixture of youthful exuberance, peer pressure and excessive alcohol have all too often contributed to the premature loss of young lives in this country, but this social media platform has presented a new dimension to this threat and that has been contributed to further by the advent of Neknomination. I am anxious to know what measures the Minister is taking to try to address this unhealthy development and what discussions she has had, if any, with her colleague the Minister for Health, or other Cabinet colleagues on this matter.
This issue will primarily be impacted by young people's understanding, information and education and the potentially serious consequences of being involved.
I have been in touch with Facebook and have had discussions in the past with Google and other Internet service providers, including UPC, which I met the week before last. I discussed applications that can be made available to parents to support them. The questions of educating and providing information to parents and parental supervision of the online activities of children are very important. However, the circumstances we are discussing today also relate to adults. The Government's alcohol strategy, the discussions I have been having about cyberbullying and the national anti-bullying strategy are key elements in dealing with this issue.
A combination of information and education, as well as relying on the voluntary organisations, is important. The Internet service providers also have role to play and I have been impressed, having met them, by the safety initiatives they are taking, especially for those who are under 18. In terms of blaming social media for our ills, I do not believe censorship is the answer. Having said that, if there is any question of abusive or bullying videos being posted online, the providers have an absolute obligation to take them down and they have said that, in those circumstances, they will.
I welcome the last point in particular and that the Minister has been dealing with the matter. The issue of our relationship with alcohol is a very serious one which has implications for all facets of life, but particularly for young people in terms of their mental and general health and well-being, personal development, relationships and their employment and career prospects.
It is often suggested that people in general, but young people in particular, assume so-called online identities whereby normally shy young people become extroverts online, lose their inhibitions and in some cases take on a different persona entirely. Has there been any assessment of the impact of Internet use on the mental and physical health of young people? Are there ways to ensure the online experience is not a damaging one, or worse, a deadly one?
We know that Internet usage by young Irish people is quite high. The Internet offers huge opportunities for young people and for everyone else and we do not want to over-emphasise the dangers. We also want to emphasise the opportunities it affords. Information is emerging on the scale of online bullying and general research is suggesting that young people need - as with learning to drive a car- to have information, education and support in using the Internet. Increasingly we are finding that young people are posting information to the web which is then shared widely and which becomes problematic at a later stage. They need to realise that everything that goes online is effectively publicly available. Last year I met representatives from Scotland Yard regarding some very disturbing trends whereby material that young people are posting to the Internet is being used by people involved in trafficking and other illegal activities. We need to inform and educate young people so that they can make the very best use of what can be a wonderful resource. They need to be very aware, as do their parents, of the potential downsides.
3. Deputy Thomas Pringle asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs her plans to release more than 60,000 files on forced adoptions; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6921/14]
Amharc ar fhreagraIt is 60 years since forced adoptions were legalised in this country but more than 60,000 files remain closed. The Philomena Project was launched to campaign for the release of those files. I believe the project should be listened to and its demands acted on and I tabled my question in that context.
The Adoption Act 1952 placed adoption on a regulatory footing in Ireland and, in accordance with the law, all adoptions taking place since were required to comply with that Act and subsequent legislation. The Deputy quoted a figure of 60,000 and used the phrase "forced adoptions", which I will address presently, but I am advised by the Adoption Authority of Ireland that 44,042 adoptions took place in Ireland between 1953 and 2012. Very significant changes in society and in adoption trends have taken place in the intervening period, with just 49 domestic adoptions in 2012 compared with an average of more than 1,000 per annum taking place through the 1960s, 1970s and early 1980s, in line with the laws of the day. I am also aware that some arrangements put in place in earlier decades were not within the provisions of the adoption legislation, leaving people assuming they were adopted when they in fact were not. There were also births which were the subject of illegal registrations.
I note the recent statement by the Adoption Rights Alliance which suggests "there are over 60,000 'adoption' files held by the HSE, private adoption agencies and church representatives all of which are the sole source of people’s identities". This is not necessarily the same as the proposition put forward in the Deputy’s question which suggests there exist 60,000 files on forced adoptions. I am not quite sure what the Deputy means by "forced adoptions" but I am trying to highlight here the information that is available.
I would point out that where records exist, it is to be expected that many of these relate to the tens of thousands of adoptions conducted in line with the laws of the day. It is worth noting that, while records exist on past adoptions, the nature of these records may vary greatly and many records may not be as detailed or as expansive as current day processes would require.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
The requirement in the Adoption Act 2010 that agencies providing information and tracing services would gain accreditation resulted in a number of religious orders deciding not to apply for accreditation and transferring records from their mother and baby homes and adoption societies to the Child and Family Agency. For example, in the case of the Sacred Heart Adoption Society, 25,000 records have been transferred to the agency’s regional adoption service in Cork. Work by the agency on the organising and storage of these records has taken place. The advice of the National Archives has been sought regarding the proper storage of these records which are of great significance. I would hope this process would lead to much greater clarity on the actual number and nature of adoption records in existence.
I have raised the importance of broader arrangements for the management of records directly with the Child and Family Agency and I have asked my officials to examine the work that could be undertaken with the Child and Family Agency, the Adoption Authority and other stakeholders to improve arrangements for managing and accessing the records that are available. I have been advised by the agency that it is reorganising adoption services in 2014 at a national level and will consider how best to deploy its staff to deal with this important issue to facilitate access to records where they exist.
I have highlighted in the House the constitutional and legal barriers to providing access to adoption records without the consent of the birth mother. The Adoption (Tracing and Information) Bill will address this matter, but the Legislature will be constrained by these legal considerations in the nature of any access which can be granted to adoption records. In this context, I would urge birth mothers to enrol on the National Adoption Contact Preference Register which was established in 2005 to assist adopted people and their natural families to contact each other, exchange information or state their contact preferences. They decide, through a range of information and contact options, how they wish to proceed. The Adoption Authority of Ireland has responsibility for the operation of the register. I believe there is an opportunity, in the context of the considerable public attention this area is receiving, to promote awareness among women whose children were adopted of the importance of registering their consent if contact is to be successfully re-established.
I take on board the Minister's correction of the wording of my question but while adoption may have been legalised in 1952, I personally know of a number of forced adoptions that took place after that time. While they may have been legal, they were still forced in the sense that they took place against the will of the mothers concerned. There is no doubt a lot of the information in the records may not be as complete as they would be now but I still believe that providing access to those records is vital for mothers trying to trace their children and for those who might want to trace their biological parents. The key point is to make the records available and accessible, and whether they are complete is something we will have to deal with. Many of those seeking their records understand they may not provide all the information they need or want. Nevertheless, the key issue is availability and access to enable people to get some completion in their lives.
The requirement in the Adoption Act 2010 that agencies providing information and tracing services would gain accreditation resulted in a number of religious orders deciding not to apply for accreditation and transferring records from their mother and baby homes and adoption societies to the Child and Family Agency. For example, in the case of the Sacred Heart Adoption Society, 25,000 records have been transferred to the agency’s regional adoption service in Cork. This means 25,000 files that were previously held by a private adoption agency are now with the Child and Family Agency. Work has taken place on organising the storage of these files, which is a massive job.
In the legislation I intend to bring forward, I will make it a statutory requirement that all records held by private individuals or agencies are made available to a central authority. That will mean any records we can access will be known about, can be archived and made more accessible.
I thank the Minister for her response. Regarding the archive in Cork, is the Minister satisfied there is an adequate number of staff available to archive the records and to provide access and searching assistance to those who want to trace their families? I have heard reports that only a small number of staff are dealing with the archive and that they are unable to research the files in a timely fashion. I fully appreciate that those files need to be archived. Can the Minister give an assurance that the necessary resources are in place to ensure the files are properly archived and made available?
I have had discussions with the Child and Family Agency regarding the importance of this issue.
Clearly for the individuals concerned it is key that they get access to these records as quickly as possible. Heretofore, there has not been a national approach to adoption services and Gordon Jeyes, the chief executive officer of the agency, has advised me it is reorganising the adoption services in 2014 at a national level. It will consider how best to deploy staff to deal with this important issue in order to facilitate access to the records. Quite a number of social workers have been involved in assessment and while assessments for adoption still are taking place, the inter-country and international situation regarding adoption clearly has changed considerably. Consequently, it should be possible that social workers who previously were involved in assessment should now be able to move to help people more on the tracing side. However, there still is considerable demand for assessments and people are entitled under the law to have an assessment even though very few, relatively speaking, inter-country or national adoptions are taking place. There still is demand for assessments because people obviously are hopeful they may be able to adopt and, as Ireland reaches agreement with different countries, that the number of children available for inter-country adoption will increase. While the level of resources the Government can make available is an issue that must be considered, every effort will be made to respond to individual queries.
4. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs when she will bring forward adoption information and tracing legislation; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6952/14]
Amharc ar fhreagraIn light of the recent film "Philomena", the international spotlight is back on Ireland again and not in a good sense. To follow up on the inquiries of my colleague, Deputy Pringle, regarding adoptions and releasing the records, when will the Minister bring forward the promised information and tracing legislation? This is legislation the Minister herself promised almost three years ago.
As I have told the Deputy a number of times, both in this Chamber and in committee, my Department and I continue to work on this legislation and I am in constant contact with the Office of the Attorney General. I have told the Deputy repeatedly that I obviously seek to introduce legislation that makes it as easy as possible for people to trace their origins and to get as much information as possible. One reason for the discussions with the Attorney General is to continue to tease out precisely how this can be done in the context of what I must state is extremely strong legal advice about the constitutional protection of the rights of the natural mother to privacy. A number of European court cases also have addressed this issue and highly complex legal and constitutional issues have arisen. I continue to explore how far the Government can go in building into legislation that right of the adopted person to get access to information without breaching the Constitution. This is precisely the reason it is taking this length of time. The Government is taking a great deal of care and has received some additional legal counsel's advice in this regard. I continue to consult and will bring forward the heads of the Bill as soon as these issues are determined fully. However, it is highly complex and work is ongoing in a dedicated fashion within both the Department and the Office of the Attorney General. As recently as yesterday, I had further advice from the Attorney General on this issue. Consequently, I am committed to bring in legislation that is as strong as possible in respect of access. However, the precise mechanisms by which this can be done are being worked on. I continue to work on the legislation, am committed to it and already have stated that as part of that legislation, the heads of the Bill will include provisions in respect of the existing documents and records. However, it is complex and I continue to work on it. I will bring it to the House as soon as these issues are determined and resolved.
I am glad the Minister has confirmed this is not something I am bringing up afresh today but is a matter I have highlighted and raised repeatedly in recent years. The Adoption Rights Alliance firmly believes there is a deliberate strategy on the part of the Government "to deny until we die". The alliance is firmly of that belief and has received no correspondence from the Minister's office since September 2013. The Minister has stated continually that her proposed legislation must be compatible with the Constitution. There is nothing new there, as all legislation must be compatible with the Constitution. However, the job of the Government is to legislate and in this regard, the Government is failing miserably. If the Attorney General is of the view that the Constitution is a roadblock to the publication of the information and tracing Bill, surely a proposal to amend the Constitution in this regard should have been put to the people at the time of the children's referendum? At present, the basic human right of any individual to know his or her identity is being denied. This right is outlined clearly in Articles 7 and 8 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and I ask the Minister to reply in this regard.
I absolutely reject the proposition that I, in any proactive way, am trying to put up a roadblock to this legislation. The opposite is the case. I am working, as is my office and that of the Attorney General, to bring forward legislation that will be as supportive as possible within the constitutional constraints to which the Deputy, this House and I are subject. If one reads the judgments of the European court in respect of this issue and if one reads the Supreme Court judgment in the IO'T v. B case, one will discern how complex is this area. I refer to the constitutional right to the protection of privacy for the natural mother. Moreover, given the way adoption is dealt with in this country, which effectively has been closed adoption from a constitutional point of view, one can discern the legal difficulties that are involved in this area. There is no question of me or my Department trying to put up a roadblock because as I stated, the precise opposite is the case. I believe the Deputy is underestimating the constitutional complexities that are involved in this legislation. I am working on these and will bring forward the strongest legislation I can as soon as I have the legal determination on those issues.
Although I concur with them, it is not me who believes there is a deliberate strategy on the part of the Government "to deny until we die". The Adoption Rights Alliance is suggesting this; not me or anyone else in this House. The alliance does not believe this issue is receiving the priority it deserves and one must recall that time is of the essence, because the longer it goes on, the older these people become and the less likely they are to be able to receive the information to ensure they have the basic human right of any citizen, that is, the right to his or her identity. The point I made was if the Minister believes, on foot of advice from the Attorney General and the legal people in her Department, that the Constitution is acting as a roadblock to this legislation, does she not then think it would have been appropriate to bring forward an amendment to the Constitution at the same time the children's rights referendum was held?
There are a number of ways of addressing this issue. Another important initiative that is taking place at present is that the Adoption Authority of Ireland board has taken a decision in principle to take a case to the High Court to clarify the position in respect of information and tracing and is in the process of identifying a relevant case. This also is a highly appropriate mechanism to test effectively the constitutional position regarding this issue. The answer to the Deputy's question is that at present, I continue to examine the precise legal framework it is feasible to put in place, given the constitutional questions that arise. This is the appropriate time for me to be doing this and I am so doing in the context of the adoption information and tracing legislation.
5. Deputy John Halligan asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs if she will review an application to the Adoption Authority of Ireland for the registration of a child adopted from Vietnam in October 2012 who is now registered and residing here (details supplied); if she will confirm that at the time of this adoption both Vietnam and Ireland had signed up to the Hague Convention and a bilateral agreement that had been put in place by her; if she will consider directing the Adoption Authority of Ireland to progress the registration of this child on the basis that its parents were in full compliance with the 1991 Act in view of the adoption process having begun prior to the 2010 Act being introduced (details supplied); and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6695/14]
Amharc ar fhreagraI believe the Minister already is familiar with the details of this unusual case in which the parents of two children adopted in this country from Vietnam find themselves in legal limbo. During the adoption process, the couple in question did everything asked of them to comply with legal requirements. However, in the case of their second child, there was a change in legislation during the adoption process, which means they now are prohibited from registering the adoption on the register of inter-country adoptions.
The Deputy is raising an individual case. As he knows, responsibility for individual inter-country adoption lies with the Adoption Authority in its capacity as an independent, quasi-judicial body established under the Adoption Act 2010. It is a matter for the Adoption Authority to ensure all adoptions are carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Hague Convention. I have asked, however, that the individual issues raised by the Deputy in this instance be responded to by the Adoption Authority as soon as possible.
While adoptions ceased from Vietnam between 2009 and 2012 - they have recently recommenced, I am glad to say - some applicants may have chosen to undertake a foreign domestic adoption in Vietnam. In such cases, the residency requirements of the 2010 Act provide that both adopters must be habitually resident in the country of adoption at the time of the adoption being effected. This differs from an inter-country adoption, whereby both applicants should be habitually resident in Ireland while the adoption is effected in the sending state. The Adoption Authority has advised me that for the purposes of defining "habitual residence" for the recognition of a foreign domestic adoption pursuant to section 57(2)(b)(i) of the Adoption Act 2010, where a child is jointly adopted by two adopters, both adopters must be habitually resident in the country of adoption at the time of the adoption being effected.
The registration of all adoptions is a matter for the Adoption Authority and it is not open to me to intervene in individual cases. I have no powers to do so and it would be inappropriate. These matters are often very complex. In such circumstances, it is often beneficial for the applicants to have independent legal advice in order that they are fully informed about the constraints within which the Adoption Authority must make its decisions. I do not know whether the couple in question has such advice.
Overall, there has been significant progress in inter-country adoption relationships between Ireland and Vietnam. We have signed the administrative agreement with Vietnam. It is the first such agreement entered into by Ireland and Vietnam since both countries ratified the Hague Convention.
I thank the Minister for her response and intervention. The application was made in good faith by the couple, who at all times intended to satisfy fully all the requirements. This included the mother moving to Vietnam with her eldest child to live and work there for a year. However, unknown to the couple, when they were in Vietnam the requirements were altered in the Adoption Act 2010. A new requirement was that both parents needed to be in the country. One was already in the country at the time the legislation was changed. The couple have done all in their power to comply. On the legal question, the only avenue for appeal open to the family, according to Minister, is a High Court application. The family is very sincere and has spent an enormous amount of money living in Vietnam over a period of two years. It really does not have the finances to appeal to the High Court. I appeal to the Minister on behalf of this sincere family who did not intend to work outside the legislation but who were caught by a legislative change when in Vietnam. The Minister might intervene on the family's behalf.
I have asked the Adoption Authority to respond. I ask the couple to make all the information the Deputy has put on the record available to the authority. The authority has to take full account of the law as it stands, and it must take into account the best interest of the child in any decision it takes. I do not have the power to intervene in individual cases but I have asked that the various matters and the individual issue the Deputy raised be responded to by the authority as soon as possible.
I thank the Minister. I am happy with her response and will await the response of the Adoption Authority.
