HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2)
2016-11-29 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Adoption (Review) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 16 November 2016.)

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD (15:47): I rise to speak on the Adoption (Review) Amendment Bill. From the outset, I indicate that Family First is generally supportive of the provisions of this bill. This bill includes a number of appropriate amendments to the Adoption Act 1988, which we have been advocating for some time, including providing for the adoption of adults, providing the court with power to discharge an adoption order under certain circumstances, and recording birth certificates in line with the truest account of the child's biological parentage. Family First will be supporting these provisions and the other sensible measures contained in this bill.

Adoption is something that I have a personal connection to. My father and my wife were both adopted many years ago. More often than not, adoption is a win-win situation for all involved. The adoptive parents receive the joy and blessing of adding a child to their family, and for those who are not otherwise able to have children adoption fulfils their dreams of raising a child. However, arguably the most rewarding aspect of adoption is providing a child with a loving and stable environment.

As we have seen, due to a variety of reasons, there has been a steady decline in the number of adoptions for many years now. In 2014-15, there were only 292 adoptions in total across Australia, according to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. In the last 25 years, there has been a 74 per cent decline in adoptions in Australia—a huge percentage. Moreover, due to the low numbers of local babies and children being put up for adoption in South Australia, there has been a growing trend towards adopting children from overseas, which the current act also accommodates.

Nevertheless, the bill mostly includes reasonable and necessary changes to the Adoption Act. There is, however, one aspect of the bill that Family First will not support and that is the clause relating to the definition of qualifying relationship. The current bill reads:

qualifying relationship means the relationship between 2 persons who are living together in a marriage or marriage-like relationship (irrespective of their sex or gender identity);

This definition proposes to extend adoption rates to same-sex couples and will not be supported by Family First.

A recent study conducted by the US Department of Health and Human Services, which reported to Congress, made noteworthy findings in relation to stable family structures and living arrangements. The study examined six categories of living arrangements and found that the safest type, according to their definition of a family, is a child living with two married biological parents. Adding to this, a study by Charles Sturt University professor Sotirios Sarantakos compared 174 children living in heterosexual married, heterosexual cohabiting or homosexual cohabiting homes. The study concluded that there is strong evidence to suggest that 'married couples seem to offer the best environment for a child's social and educational development'.

Mothers and fathers have, for many centuries, provided a strong foundation for their children. Any departure from this should be met with appropriate caution. With those words, I commend the majority of the bill to the chamber, but reiterate that Family First will not be supporting the proposed definition of a qualifying relationship.

The Hon. J.A. DARLEY (15:50): I rise very briefly to indicate my support for this bill, which, among other things, will remove discrimination against same-sex couples and single people who want to adopt. Whilst I have been lobbied by constituents who are concerned about the removal of veto powers, I have been reassured by the minister and the department that anyone who believes that they are adversely affected is able to make application to the chief executive to have their details withheld and that there would be very few circumstances where the chief executive would not allow this. With that, I support the bill.

The Hon. K.L. VINCENT (15:51): I also take the floor to lend my support to this bill, which is a bill that, amongst other things, seeks to establish a provision for the adoption of adult persons where there has been a parent-like relationship for some time and that can be proven, and also extend the eligibility for adoption to single people and same-sex couples.

Unfortunately, we need only open a newspaper or turn on our radio these days to hear stories of children and young people who, to put it very lightly, do not have the right thing done by them. Given that there is so much hardship, difficulty and pain in the world for children and young people at the moment, I believe that we must do anything we can to spread our net as widely as possible to ensure that we are finding anyone who is able to provide a safe and loving home for children and young people. I certainly believe that that can be provided regardless of relationship status, gender or romantic and sexual orientation.

Adoption is an issue that is also, as for the Hon. Mr Hood, quite close to my heart personally. I have two beautiful adopted cousins, Kaitlin and Thomas, who were both adopted (at different times) from Thailand many years ago. I also somewhat argue that I have an adoptive parent, not in the official legal sense, but in the sense that he earned it. He is Geoff, my mum's partner. I sometimes call him dad, but not often, because then he would know that he won the battle with teenage me for my heart, but he certainly did earn that.

I would also like to pause at this point to point out that the people whom I consider my parents, Colleen and Geoff, are unmarried. As far as I am aware, they do not have any intention to marry, but they have been together for over 10 years now and their relationship is certainly just as valid, meaningful and loving as any other. I think all I would really like to say is that this is an issue that is very close to my heart for a lot of reasons and I am very happy to support this bill. I may, however, have some questions at the committee stage, and I look forward to asking those, but in general principle, I lend my strong support to this bill.

The Hon. G.E. GAGO (15:54): I rise today to make a very brief statement of support for this bill, given that a particular section of this bill will be determined by a conscience vote, that section involving same-sex couples' ability to adopt. I want to put on the record that I am a longstanding supporter of equal rights, and therefore I support this bill in full. This bill will allow South Australia to catch up with the rest of Australia, bar the Northern Territory, with the provision for same-sex adoption.

This move towards equality is long overdue, and I want to congratulate those who have worked on this bill, particularly the individuals and organisations in our community who have campaigned for this reform and those in this chamber who have indicated their support for this bill. I commend the bill to the council.

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (15:55): I also rise, on behalf of the Greens, to commend this piece of legislation. I note that it is quite revolutionary and extensive in its overhaul of the Adoption Act; indeed, many measures under the act that were well-meaning nearly 30 years ago, are now unworkable or unwanted.

The updates to the act reflect well upon its new objects and guiding principles, and these underline the paramount importance of the best interests, welfare and rights of the child and the preservation of cultural heritage, and encourage openness and access to information. Having these principles set in writing will greatly assist the courts and the wider community to consider these often difficult roles into the future.

A number of the new provisions are decidedly common sense, and I will take some time now to thank Professor Lorna Hallahan on what would have been a long and emotionally-charged task in compiling the review, which has led to the following provisions:

allowing the adoption of adults;

allowing the court to discharge adoption orders, such as in cases of abuse;

the phasing out of information vetoes; and

the retention of the child's first name.

All these provisions reflect the changing attitudes to adoption, that it is no longer a shameful secret and that it should prioritise supportive relationships over state intervention.

It is incredibly disappointing, indeed shameful, to see the provisions bringing single-parent adoption fully into the 21st century being amended, in the lower house, from the original version of this bill. I believe we will see how these changes play out in our courts, because they are discriminatory; a single-parent family is no less than any other family, and I think it is shameful that the other place made those particular amendments.

The Greens stand up for families in all their shapes and forms, in particular single parents. They are not somehow lesser because there are not two parents; indeed, as we have allowed single parents to adopt in, as the legislation provides, 'special circumstances' for many years now, and the special circumstances have largely been cases where children have severe special needs, it has clearly shown that the commitment and care of these single parents is paramount in providing a supportive environment for children. It is not based on the number of bodies in a room but what is in their heart and what they can provide for these young people.

The seemingly and so-called contentious part of this bill, the conscience part of this bill, is something the Greens have supported for many years. We have inclusive policies, and we will support those same-sex couples to adopt in this state. It is a great pleasure to see South Australia come into line with many overseas jurisdictions—and some interstate jurisdictions—in recognising a person who can prove themselves to fit the criteria that is placed upon adoptive parents, which is in no way the criteria that the member for Waite seems to think it is.

Apparently the member for Waite believes people run off and simply pick up a child on their way back from the grocery store. He seems to think the adoptive process is somehow easy or something that people do just on a whim. He has a long way to go if he is to understand the processes that those who adopt children, not just in this state but around the world, have to go through. It is an extraordinarily arduous process, and rightly so. It is not a process one comes to easily or without a great deal of effort.

Indeed, as I have pointed out to the member for Waite on the wireless (as the Hon. Ian Hunter would have it called), it is actually those same straight people who can go out, on a whim, and get themselves pregnant. We have done nothing to stop those occurrences, yet we have denounced and derided, and not supported, loving, same-sex couples who simply want to create loving family situations for those children and those families. I know who I would back in terms of the commitment and the loving environment that can be brought, and it is those families who put that effort in.

Of course, we cannot not reflect on the story of one particular couple and family who have made their home in South Australia, and that is the family headed by Shaun and Blue Douglas-Galley. They are two fathers who have travelled from the UK to make Adelaide their home, and they will now have long overdue legal recognition of their parenthood to their two young sons Joshi and Dylan. I wish them well here in South Australia, and I am glad that we have finally stepped up to the mark and will provide them with equality should these bills pass.

They, along with countless other couples, have forged their own way while we, as lawmakers, have dithered. It will be a happy day to see peace of mind for these families across our state as they are accepted. In summing up, I would like to thank all those who have been involved in what has been a fight for equality, and I commend the government for bringing these pieces of legislation here in government time. In closing, I note the words of American author Jane Howard:

Call it a clan, call it a network, call it a tribe, call it a family. Whatever you call it, whoever you are, you need one.

I am proud that today we will be providing one to many South Australians.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. J.M.A. Lensink.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT