ADOPTION

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD (15:55): Today I rise to bring to the chamber's attention our appalling regime for adopting children here in South Australia. I call on the minister to conduct an urgent inquiry into why adoption is not working in South Australia any more. I refer to some figures I was given at a recent Budget and Finance Committee meeting. In the financial year 1972-73, 467 children were adopted in this state. By 1982-83 that number had plummeted to just 78, and in the financial year 2006-07 that number had dropped again to only five individual adoptions granted on locally born children in this state.

Families SA has called it 'a significant and rapid decline in the rate of adoption of locally born children' over the past few decades, and it has blamed it on a range of factors, including the wider use of contraception and higher abortion rates, amongst other things. One other reason for the drop is, and again I quote from the response, 'significant changes to adoption legislation and practice'.

I suspect that bureaucracy and red tape get in the way far too much during the adoption process. In fact, one mother who applied to adopt a child was informed that her application would sit in a desk drawer for five years before anyone would look at it. She told me this only a few months back, and that was the reason she applied for an overseas adoption instead. In this state we have far too few adoptions and far too many children placed in the impermanent world of foster care.

There are currently 1,791 children in our foster care system, with no assurance of permanency. Why cannot these children be candidates for adoption, or at least some of them? Adoption is a more secure and permanent environment for children than foster care, and higher adoption rates of newborn babies is also a far better alternative than high abortion rates. With declining fertility rates and an ageing population, it makes sense.

Indeed, New South Wales has recently proposed sweeping reform of its adoption system, including:

simplifying eligibility to increase the focus on parenting capabilities;

allowing women to apply for adoption while trying to have their own children through fertility programs; and

making adoption more attractive to foster carers by allowing them to retain their foster carer allowances.

We also need to look to cut the red tape and simplify the process for putting up children for adoption, including the implementation of a so-called 'no questions asked' policy, which has worked well in other jurisdictions. There must be a better way than forcing prospective parents to scour overseas at great cost, delay and personal anguish to find a child so that they can start or continue their family. In September last year I wrote to Families SA asking four simple questions:

1. Why are there virtually no local adoptions currently?

2. What methods are used to screen prospective parents?

3. Are women considering an abortion required to be given the option to adopt, or are they provided with material from Families SA regarding the option of adoption to inform them?

4. Are parents in long-term foster carer situations presented with the option to adopt children in their care without losing their benefits where appropriate?

I am yet to be satisfied that Families SA takes these matters seriously and, after discussions with several stakeholders, an internal inquiry rather than a parliamentary inquiry was agreed as the best way to achieve action within the department.

This is a personal issue for me. I think members know that my wife was adopted. My father was also adopted. It concerns me that adoption is no longer a serious option for mothers or expectant mothers who cannot care for their children or expected child in the future. I will be contacting the minister and supplying him with my comments here and my concerns. I am requesting that he undertake a review at the earliest opportunity. This is a very important issue and it needs to be addressed as quickly as possible.