SBS Radio - “The question of same-sex adoption”

In New South Wales same-sex couples are not allowed to adopt, but a private member's bill is seeking to change that.

Independent MP Clover Moore recently introduced the bill, which will be debated when parliament returns from its winter break in late August.
Adoption by same-sex couples can be an emotive issue, inciting a broad range of opinions in the community.

Laws governing adoption by same-sex couples vary from state to state with little uniformity.
The policy coordinator with the New South Wales Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby, Senthorn Raj, says the country's same-sex adoption laws range widely.

There are very few states and territories in Australia that permit same-sex-couple adoption.
Western Australia and the ACT permit same-sex couples eligibility to adopt.

Tasmania permits a second-parent adoption mechanism for same-sex couples, which applies to step-parents.

Other states and territories currently do not have any mechanism permitting same-sex couples eligibility to adopt.

Raj says there is a misconception in the community that same-sex couples are primarily seeking to adopt unknown children.

He points out very few children are adopted domestically in Australia or overseas.
Instead, he argues, the real issue is about children already living with same-sex parents.
Across Australia there are over 4,300 children who live in same-sex families, but those children are being denied the legal recognition of both their parents.

This compromises the legal entitlements and rights a child is able to access around superannuation, workers compensation, custody and contact with their parent after a relationship breakdown.

Jenni Millbank, of the Faculty of Law at the University of Technology in Sydney, also argues law reform is primarily about children in existing relationships.

For same-sex couples the major issue with adoption is that if they foster or look after a child or children over a long period of time, as a couple they are not then eligible to adopt those children and give them a more secure environment.

They are also excluded from step-parent adoptions.

This means that a same-sex couple where one biological parent has died or there is no other legal parent, in the case of a lesbian couple who have had a child or in the case of assisted conception, for example, the family cannot formalise a parenting arrangement that is already in place.

Millbank says law-reform processes and parliamentary committees are important in letting everyone have a say on issues like same-sex adoption.

She says that generally they show you cannot make an absolute finding, based on sexual orientation or family structure, about what is good or bad for children.

Instead, Millbank argues, you need to look at individual people and couples and their parenting styles and the way they interact with children and make a finding about whether those specific adults are right for that specific child.

Political party Family First opposes adoption by same-sex couples, saying the number of children already living with same-sex parents does not justify law reform in the area.

Dennis Hood, a member in the upper house of the South Australian parliament for Family First, is opposed to legalising same-sex adoption.

Hood argues that the very small number affected by the arguments Millbank outlines does not justify a change in legislation.

He says one of the implications of a change parenting laws that allows homosexual couples to adopt children is that it would mean a change in the whole terminology of what parenting is.
Hood says parents may no longer be referred to as mother and father. They would become co-parents because, in some cases, the actual biological parent of the child is no longer included on the birth certificate.

Different groups have called on the Federal Government to take over adoption laws so they are more consistent.

But Hood claims legal reform would set a precedent he does not think Australia needs.
He argues that children have been brought up, where possible, by a mother and father for thousands of years. To change that role may be beneficial for the small minority of parents, but questions whether it is beneficial for the children themselves.

When it comes to fostering children, many agencies, especially, with religious affiliations, can reject some carers based on exemptions granted by the Anti-Discrimination Act.

While exemptions vary from state to state, it is not unusual for faith-affiliated groups to reject same-sex couples' applications based on those exemptions.

Barnardos Australia is a foster-care agency based in New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory that openly recruits same-sex couples.

Chief Executive Officer Louise Voigt says the main priority for Barnardos is not the carers' sexuality, but their ability to take care of traumatised children.

She says that with same-sex couples it can be difficult because they are not approved as adoptive families. They have a number of (same-sex) carers who are highly successful and they do not want to move those children, who have strong attachments but still need the security of adoption.

Voigt says she would like to see legal reform because it would allow many of Barnardos carers to permanently adopt the children they care for.

She says that, with around one in three children eventually adopted, permanency is always in the child's best interests.

[Source: Original Article]

Read More

Southern Star - “Adoption Battle Underway” by Andie Noonan

Victorian activists plan to make same-sex adoption an election issue in the lead-up to the state poll.

With NSW expected to vote in favour of same-sex adoption in August, Rainbow Families Council convenor Felicity Marlowe said a Victorian campaign would be ramped up in the coming weeks.

“Adoption is the main thing we’re campaigning on during the election, but it’s not just adoption, we want the remaining recommendations in the Law Reform Commission report to be implemented,” she told Southern Star.

The Victorian Law Reform Commission recommended same-sex adoption in its 2002 Assisted Reproductive Technology and Adoption report.

The Assisted Reproduction Technology (ART) Bill passed in 2008 as a result of that report.

While allowing lesbians access to IVF and the inclusion of non-biological lesbian mothers on birth certificates was seen as a significant step forward, same-sex adoption failed to gain traction in the suite of reforms.

The Rainbow Families Council will talk to its membership and other rainbow family organisations including Gay Dads Victoria before structuring a campaign.

Marlowe said it was likely the campaign would also push for more inclusive policies and practices for diverse families in the early childhood development sector.

Rainbow Families Council member and gay dad Rodney Chiang-Cruise said allowing known parent adoption for same-sex couples would have a huge impact on gay dads, often left in legal limbo.

“If we look at what our ultimate aim is, it is to be recognised as legal parents and the best way to do that is known or second-parent adoption,” he said.

“That would make a huge practical difference and a very important symbolic difference to those children on a day-to-day basis.”

Chiang-Cruise said the issue for gay surrogate fathers was complicated as they are in the difficult legal position of only being classified as donors to their children.

“There was a sense that gay dads got nothing out of [the ART reforms], but there was little to offer us in a sense, because lesbians were coming from a position of carrying the child which makes her a mother, whereas gay men are always donors, whether they have a child through surrogacy or they co-parent,” he said.

“The real issue for surrogate dads comes down to getting something better than a parenting order or a consent order from the Family Court which gives you parenting rights, but doesn’t make you technically a parent.”

The Rainbow Families Council is seeking help from the Public Interest Law Clearing House to prepare a research paper on the current legal standing of gay parents.

[Source: Original Article]

Read More

Revisiting the 2007 Victorian Law Reform Commission Report on Same Sex Adoption by Rodney Cruise

In light of the recent Adoption legislative proposals in New South Wales relating to same sex adoption, I thought it was time to revisit what is happening (or not as the case may be) in Victoria.

In 2007 the Victorian Law Reform Commission (VLRC) released a report called "Assisted Reproductive Technology - Adoption: Final Report". The Report stated:

“Adoption of babies is now rare. Same-sex couples are currently unable to adopt children in Victoria. The commission believes that it is important that the widest possible pool of people is available to help these children. Research shows that a parent’s sexuality is not a predictor of harm to children”.

The summary report is available here and as you will note of all the recommendations, Adoption was the only one that was not acted on by the State Government of Victoria.  Adoption is important to Same Sex couples in Victoria.  Whether you have done surrogacy overseas and want access to second parent or known adoption or whether you want to be able to adopt an unknown child, this reform is important to you.

A State Election is fast approaching in Victoria and the Rainbow Families Council is looking at stepping at lobbying on this issue.  People who are interested in assisting in helping out the lobbying campaign are encouraged to contact Rainbow Families Council to lend a hand.

Read More

Australian Gay and Lesbian Law Blog - "Same Sex Couples Need Not Apply" by Stephen Page

Stephen Page reports on the Australian Gay & Lesbian Law Blog:

The Queensland Government has introduced today the Adoption Bill into the Queensland Parliament, to replace the antiquated Adoption of Children Act 1964. The Minister responsible, Margaret Keech, said about the Bill:

* it was "delivering fair laws to those people affected by adoption"
* it reflected "contemporary community standards"
* "Eligibility to lodge expressions of interest to adopt will be extended from married couples to de facto couples who have been in a relationship for at least two years."
* was "in line with the Bligh government's vision for a fairer Queensland"
* by now requiring adoption orders to be made by a court, "provides for this and brings Queensland into line with every other Australian jurisdiction".
* "The current objective is to identify the best possible prospective adoptive families to meet the needs of the small number of children who require adoptive parents."
* "Finally, in line with the Bligh Government's vision for a fairer Queensland,I am proud this Bill is a very progressive piece of new legislation which will bring Queensland's adoption practice in line with international best practice." (emphasis added)

The Bill will remove the discrimination that exists in the 1964 Act against heterosexual de facto couples, but not against same sex couples.

Just so that it is clear, the Bill is expressed to override the Anti-Discrimination Act. The only obvious reason for this is so that same sex couples can be discriminated against.
This approach is different to that in places such as Western Australia and the ACT where same sex couples can adopt.

For the full speech by the Minister, click here[PDF] .
For the Bill, click here.

[Link: Original Article]

Read More

Sydney Star Observer - " Gay Adoption Next" - by Harley Dennet

The NSW Government has promised a parliamentary inquiry into legalising same-sex adoption after making changes to speed up the approval process for heterosexuals.

“The issue of same-sex adoption was not included in the amendments, however, it was agreed the issue would be referred to the Law and Justice Committee,” a spokesman for Community Services Minister Linda Burney said. “We look forward to the committee’s findings and when the report is due we’ll look at the issue.”

The inquiry will hold hearings early in 2009 to coincide with a separate ongoing inquiry into altruistic surrogacy.

This comes more than 10 years after the NSW Law Reform Commission recommended the current ban against same-sex couples be dropped, and more than two years since another review by the Department of Community Services was handed to the Government.

Attempts by Sydney Star Observer to obtain the 2006 DOCS report through freedom of information laws were unsuccessful as it contained recommendations. It is still not confirmed that the report recommended legalising same-sex adoption.

Stranger adoptions are uncommon due to the low number of Australian children available — around 20 per year. Countries allowing overseas adoptions generally do not use same-sex couples.

Most cases where same-sex adoption would apply are in existing foster arrangements with a gay couple.

The Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby strongly supported the inquiry into the last piece of NSW law that still discriminates against same-sex couples.

“NSW is in the ludicrous position of allowing individual lesbians and gay men to be assessed for adoption eligibility, but not same-sex couples. This discrimination hurts children by denying legal and social recognition to lesbian and gay parents,” Lobby spokesman Peter Johnson said.

“Adoption reform is essential for long-term foster carers, some step-parents and co-parents. Adoption would give children the economic and emotional stability which comes with the recognition of their families.”

This year co-mothers were given the right to legally adopt the biological children of their partner if they participated in the artificial conception process. But co-fathers were not included.

The inquiry into altruistic surrogacy laws heard in October gay men have
been seeking commercial surrogacy options in the US due to a lack of parenting options in Australia. That inquiry is not expected to report until the second half of 2009. Liberal powerbroker David Clarke is on both inquiries.


[Link: Original Article ]

Read More

SX - "Rights groups push for state parenting reforms"by Adam Bub and Rachel Cook

The Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby are calling for the New South Wales State Government to recognise same-sex families, after Premier Morris Iemma announced last week that his government would amend the Adoption Act to help foster carers, step-parents and other relatives adopt a child in their care.

Emily Gray, GLRL co-convenor, said that the government has shown no intention yet to extend these rights to same-sex parents. “It is an absurd state of affairs …when individual lesbians and gay men are eligible for adoption, but same-sex couples are not,” Gray said, in a statement.

Meanwhile, in Victoria, Premier John Brumby announced a conscience vote on state legislation regarding lesbians' and single women’s access to artificial reproduction technology (ART) and surrogacy. Recommended by the Victorian Law Reform Commission in June 2007 and accepted by the government in December 2007, the legislation would allow lesbians and gay men greater access to having children.

Felicity Marlowe, spokes-person for Victoria’s Rainbow Families Council, told SX that “we are very confident that the best interests and rights of our children will win over other issues that might get in the way.”

But some politicians have already vetoed the idea. Peter Hall, Nationals MP, told SX: “I’ve never supported that concept before and I don’t expect I will change my mind.”

[Link: Original Article]

Read More

ABC Online - "No adoption rights for same-sex couples: Bligh"

Ms Bligh says only about 20 babies are now put up for adoption each year in Queensland.

Queensland Premier Anna Bligh says same-sex couples will not be allowed to adopt children under proposed new laws.

State Cabinet yesterday approved several changes, including allowing de facto couples in long-term relationships to adopt.

The Government has also released a discussion paper on whether to give children and 'birth parents' involved in pre-1991 adoptions more access to information about each other.

Ms Bligh says only about 20 babies are now put up for adoption each year in Queensland.

"In an environment when you have such a small number of babies and such a large number of couples seeking to adopt, the onus is on the state to make a judgement about the best possible placement for a child and the prospect of that being anything other than couples as I have described, we think is very low," she said.

[Link: Original Article]

Read More

Australian Gay & Lesbian Law Blog - "NSW: Considering further review of Adoption Laws" by Stephen Page

Stephen Page from Brisbane, Queensland, Australia is a partner with Harrington Family Lawyers, Brisbane, a long established boutique family law firm. He writes a wonderful blog called "Australian Gay and Lesbian Law Blog". [Ed - Rodney Cruise]

Stephen Page from the Australian Gay and Lesbian Law Blog is reporting that New South Wales are now considering same sex adoption:

Minister for Women, Verity Firth, during debate on laws to change 55 pieces of legislation including allowing lesbian co-parents to be recognised on the birth certificates, had this to say about adoption:

Currently, gays and lesbians, as individuals, can adopt children, subject to the same process of screening for suitability as heterosexual men and women.

The Minister for Community Services is considering adoption by all New South Wales prospective partners in the context of a broader response to a review of the Adoption Act 2000.

[Link: Original Article]

Read More

Sydney Star Observer - "Parenting Laws Pass Despite Church Campaign" by Harley Dennett

Children born to lesbian couples through artificial insemination can now have both mothers on their birth certificates after the Iemma Government’s parenting reforms passed 64 votes to 11 last week.

Despite Anglican and fathers’ rights groups campaigning strongly against the changes, only a quarter of Coalition members voted against the bill in the lower house, with a further quarter failing to turn up.

The bill passed the upper house without individual votes being recorded.

Minister for Women Verity Firth acknowledged the reforms did not address all the parenting needs of same-sex couples, but were designed to address the most common circumstances.

“The Minister for Community Services [Kevin Greene] is considering adoption by all prospective partners in the context of a broader response to a review of the Adoption Act 2000,” she said.

“Currently, gays and lesbians, as individuals, can adopt children, subject to the same process of screening for suitability as heterosexual men and women.

“Surrogacy is a developing area of law ... being considered as part of the development of a national surrogacy framework. At this stage it would be premature for any changes to be made in NSW.”

It is also now illegal to discriminate on the basis of domestic status, which had Christian Democrat leader Fred Nile claiming critical debate of same-sex relationships could result in a $40,000 fine.

“I have been before the Anti-Discrimination Board in relation to what I regard as trivial matters,” Nile told Parliament.

“Vexatious individuals could say, ‘I’ve got another weapon to use against the people I disagree with’. It costs the person who made the complaint nothing.”

Liberal MLC Charlie Lynn used the parliamentary privilege to attack previous equal age of consent reforms as “exposing vulnerable young boys to sexual predators” and accused the Government of not having a public mandate on these issues.

Nationals leader Andrew Stoner warned the Government was embarking on plans to undermine bans on same-sex marriage, adoption and IVF [sic], but voted for the bill anyway.

Sydney MP Clover Moore joined Greens Leader Lee Rhiannon in calling on the government to proceed with “urgent adoption reform”.

[Link: Original Article]

Read More

MCV - "Nelson affirms queer stance"

Opposition Leader Brendan Nelson confirmed the Liberal Party’s stance on GLBT rights in a speech to the National Press Club recently.

“We believe … in relation to people, that families are the foundation of Australian society,” Nelson said.

“I make no apology for saying that a man and a woman is a marriage and that forms a family. I don’t support gay marriage, I don’t support gay adoption and I don’t support gay IVF.

"But I sure as hell believe very strongly that no Australian should pay a dollar more in tax or receive a dollar less in social security by virtue of his or her sexuality.”

[Link: Original Article]

Read More

MCV - "Baywatch star a 'gay role model' "

The Australian-born star of the hit TV series, Baywatch, has been described as a "much needed role model" after revealing plans to marry his male partner.

Jaason Simmons, who played hunky lifeguard Logan Fowler on Baywatch in the mid-1990s, plans to wed his partner of eight months, Irish actor John O'Callaghan.

Simmons told New Idea magazine he would wed O'Callaghan in Canada and co-adopt his boyfriend's adopted six-year-old son.

"We’re doing it for our family and for my soon-to-be son," the former Playgirl cover model said.

"Although you don’t want to typecast yourself, you have to take responsibility and ownership and move humanity forward, out of bigotry.

"Our son needs to see we can stand in front of family and loved ones who are going to support our union through the good times and bad," he added.

However, Simmons' own homeland, Australia, will not be among the supporters, warned Tasmanian Gay and Lesbian Rights Group spokesperson Rodney Croome.

"Even after Jaason Simmons is married in Canada, his vows will be ignored under Australian national law and he will be treated as if he is single," Croome said.

Croome hailed Simmons, who was born on the Apple Isle, as a "much-needed role model".

"Many young gay Tasmanians still grow up feeling isolated and stigmatised," he said.

"The success of Jaason Simmons, both in his professional and personal life, sends a message to young, gay Tasmanians that they can achieve their goals, and need not be limited by other people's prejudices."


[Link: Original Article]

Read More

New Idea - "Jaason’s Soulmate"

After quitting Baywatch, Aussie TV star Jaason Simmons did a lot of soul searching – now he’s about to marry his boyfriend and become a dad!

Baywatch hunk Jaason Simmons has revealed for the first time that he’s gay – and that he plans to wed his lover, Irish actor John O’Callaghan, and together raise the boy John rescued from an African orphanage. Jaason’s handsome face lights up with happiness whenever he’s in the presence of John, his partner of eight months. And his smile increases when six-year-old Odin, the Ugandan boy John adopted two years ago, comes home from school and joins them. Clearly they are a real family unit, and it will soon become official. John proposed a few months after they met and Jaason immediately said ‘yes’. When the two men wed later this year, Tasmanian-born Jaason will officially become Odin’s second father.

It’s a long way from flirting with bikiniclad babes on TV’s Baywatch in his role as bad boy lifeguard Logan Fowler, but privately Jaason was miserable riding that wave.

So in 1997, after three years on the show and with two years still on his contract, he quit, turning his back on Hollywood. He spent time in a Buddhist monastery in Wales, then returned to the limelight to make independent films like Mad Cowgirl and do theatre in London.

Jaason met John, a charismatic stage actor who has appeared in the TV series Stargate Atlantis, over coffee in Los Angeles in August 2007. A friend played matchmaker, and it was love at first sight for both. ‘When you get older you know what you want faster,’ says Jaason, now 37, explaining how quickly they fell in love and committed themselves to one another and to raising Odin. Because gay marriage isn’t recognised in California, they plan to wed in Canada, one of just five countries where same-sex marriage is legal, as John has dual citizenship. For Jaason, this readymade family feels like coming home after years adrift.

While the actor’s sexual orientation isn’t news to his close friends and family, nor to the woman he married when he was 20, TV viewers and fans weren’t aware. But being openly gay on Baywatch was impossible – as impossible as it had been for him growing up in Tasmania, where homosexuality wasn’t decriminalised until 1997. The saving grace for Jaason was that with his Baywatch castmates he was among good friends who knew the truth.

His emotional crisis during the show wasn’t solely to do with having to hide his sexuality – although that was part of it. After losing his father at the age of seven, Jaason had felt empty inside, and the fame of Baywatch, which had over a billion TV viewers, and the trappings of success left him feeling surprisingly hollow.

and he has since been active in trying to save the endangered Tasmanian rainforests. In 1995, as his unhappiness built, he found solace in a loving – but platonic – friendship with Baywatch actress Alexandra Paul. Suddenly they were tabloid fodder, being portrayed as a glossy Hollywood romance. In reality Alexandra, whose twin sister is gay, understood Jaason’s predicament and was his first confidante on the set. They’re still close friends, and Alexandra has met Odin. John’s journey was quite similar to Jaason’s. He was once engaged to a woman, and was openly gay in private with those he trusted, but feared being stereotyped if he came out professionally. Like Jaason, he had worked steadily in TV and theatre, but he wanted more from life than the Hollywood dream.

John met Odin when he spent two months in Kassese, Uganda, accompanying a documentary filmmaker friend. The small town’s orphanage housed 50 children and one
caretaker. Odin, then three, had malaria. He wasn’t HIV positive – although even if he had been, John says he would have been undeterred, because he felt such a strong pull to the child. ‘I felt he was my son,’ he says. ‘I just fell for him right away.’ Initially his adoption attempt failed, as Uganda has a threeyear residency requirement. But after multiple setbacks, John eventually broke through Uganda’s red tape. He passed FBI checks and completed the required home study course, and after nine months he finally got to take his son home. Jaason and John are sharing their story in the hope that more people will be inspired to adopt from sub-Saharan Africa, where there are 34 million orphans.

Jaason, how did you meet John?
JS: A friend texted me saying: ‘I’ve met your soulmate!’ I knew she wouldn’t say that lightly, she knows I’m a very spiritual person and don’t have time to muck around, and I’ve never been into dating. We met at a coffee shop, and the minute John turned around, you know they say you hear love poems and music playing? I’d never really felt that, but I finally understand it now, at 37! John told me he went to church on Sundays and had a son. I was like: ‘That’s cool!’ For him to adopt Odin, I knew he was a man of integrity. And he was an actor. We’d both struggled and gone through the same things.

What happened after that first blind date?
JS: We haven’t been apart since, and we haven’t stopped talking since. People said: ‘Isn’t it too quick?’ Fair enough if you’re in your 20s. But it’s different when you’re 37 and you’ve gone through the mill and been kicked around and learnt stuff. If you both want the same thing and are on the same journey, and you’re together until you pass, then what’s too fast? If you know, you know. Gay marriage isn’t legal in California, where you live.

Why do you want to marry?
JS: We’re doing it for our family and for my soon-to-be son. Although you don’t want to typecast yourself, you have to take responsibility and ownership and move humanity forward out of bigotry. Our son needs to see we can stand in front of family and loved ones who are going to support our union through the good times and bad.

Does Odin know other kids with gay parents?
JO’C: We take him to a monthly gay parent event, and I have gay friends with children, so we all hang out. Part of coming out is my belief that the more I’m proud of myself, the more he’ll grow up proud of himself, and not in any way ashamed or hurt by homophobia.

How has being a parent changed you?
JO’C: I became a man with adopting him. I was a kid, a free boy, flying to New York and Paris, going to lots of parties, and suddenly I had to stop. It was hard, but it was amazing to grow up and understand that responsibility and have someone depend on you. To love someone, and experience unconditional love.

Why did you adopt?
JO’C: People say: ‘Who’s his real father?’ I am. Birth parents are a little overrated. The father lived alone in a mud hut; lot of alcohol, he could barely look after himself. He didn’t visit Odin. But he was a lovely man. He said: ‘I give you my son! He’s a child of the nation!’ and was so excited he had a chance to go to America. We both cried. If I’d left Odin, I’d have regretted it the rest of my life. The first time he had a hot shower was amazing. To see the fear in his face, then the joy. Seeing him discover things is incredible. The sweetness of jam. He loves chips and spaghetti. He came to me with nothing, just a bunch of rags.

How long did it take to get him to the US?
JO’C: Literally nine months. I felt like I was pregnant. I even had cravings for weird food. I was on an emotional rollercoaster.

[Link: Original Article Page 1]
[Link: Original Article Page 2]

Read More

Sydney Star Observer - "Gay Parents on the Move" by Harley Dennett and Doug Pollard

The Victorian Government has moved to legalise assisted reproduction and surrogacy for same-sex couples and single people.

But federal Medicare IVF funding is yet to catch up; still the exclusive right of clinically infertile women unless Health Minister Nicola Roxon intervenes.

Adoption too remains elusive, not included in the new laws, but Victoria’s same-sex couples will still have more rights than those in NSW.

The Rainbow Families Council and Gay Dads Victoria welcomed the moves, likely to be introduced to Parliament early next year.

Under the proposal by Victorian Attorney-General Rob Hulls, only two parents of any gender may be listed on a child’s birth certificate.

“But that doesn’t stop consensual arrangements taking place in relation to the care of the child,” Hulls said.

“That can happen now, and that won’t change if there’s consent from all the parties as to who’s involved in bringing up the child.

“There were no recommendations in relation to changing the current workable arrangements that exist.”

The proposed changes also fail to address self-insemination, currently illegal for unmarried couples.

“At the moment the law is not clear, but the criminal liability under the current infertility treatment act for self-insemination was never intended to apply criminal penalties to those who self-inseminate, and that will not change,” Hulls said.

“What these recommendations propose to do is discourage self-insemination and all the risks associated with it and put appropriate regulations and guidelines around access to IVF.”

The reforms came after a report by Victorian Law Reform Commission released earlier this year that found same-sex couples are equally good at raising families.

Sources in the NSW Labor Left are confident our own Government will move forward early next year with plans to allow same-sex parents to be jointly recognised on birth certificates.

Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby convenor Emily Gray warned NSW was falling behind in providing children in same-sex families with the basic financial and emotional security that comes with the legal recognition of their parents.

“To fully recognise the diversity of family forms in our community, parenting reform must be a complete package – otherwise some of our families will miss out,” Gray said.

“The best interests of children should never be compromised for prejudice and discrimination.”

Doug Pollard is a Melbourne reporter for SSO’s sister publication bnews.

[Link: Original Article]

Read More

The Australian - "PM to Fight States on Gay Adoptions" by AAP

THE Federal Government has put itself on a new collision course with the States by proposing a ban on gay couples adopting overseas.

THE federal government has indicated it would legislate to stop same-sex Australian couples adopting a child from overseas, in a move that would over-ride state and territory laws.

The move comes days after the Prime Minister took on the States by announcing a community-based Federal Government takeover of the Mersey Hospital in Devonport.

It also comes hot on the heels of a political debate on federalism, with Prime Minister John Howard branding as archaic Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd's plan to gives states more autonomy in using federal funds.

The move could herald a bitter and divided community debate, with views among some Australians likely to be polarised on what is a sensitive issue.

WA moved in 2002 to allow same-sex couples to adopt, the ACT passed similar legislation in 2004, and Tasmanian law allows gay couples to adopt where one of the partners is a parent of the child.

Mr Howard has previously said he does not support gay couples adopting children.

"I don't support gay adoption, no," Mr Howard said in response to the ACT's law change.

"I'm against gay adoption, just as I'm against gay marriage. ''

The government says it will introduce a bill into parliament in the spring session, which begins next week, that will mean overseas adoptions by same-sex couples will not be recognised in Australia.

If it becomes law, the child would not be granted a visa to enter Australia.

The Family Law (Same Sex Adoption) Bill is listed on the Prime Minister and Cabinet department's website as legislation "proposed for introduction in the 2007 spring sittings".

It will "amend the Family Law Act 1975 to indicate that adoptions by same sex couples of children from overseas under either bilateral or multilateral arrangements will not be recognised in Australia".

Overseas adoptions currently can occur between Australia and other countries that have ratified the Hague convention, or with which Australia has a bilateral agreement.

The move follows the landmark adoption of a boy by two gay men in Western Australia in June.

Under current laws, state and territory welfare authorities have responsibility for overseeing international adoptions, including negotiating agreements with other countries and assessing and approving prospective adoptive parents.

The adoption by two men of a stranger's child is believed to be a first for Australia, and was hailed as "groundbreaking" by the WA government and gay rights groups.

"I think there are certain benchmark institutions and arrangements in our society that you don't muck around with.

"Children ideally should be brought up by a mother and a father who are married. That's the ideal."
It is not known if the opposition will support the legislation.

Labor sided with the government in June to vote down a motion in the Senate that called for singles and same-sex couples to be given equal adoption rights and access to IVF.

The motion, put by Australian Greens senator Kerry Nettle, cited a report by the Victorian Law Reform Commission which found that having single, lesbian or gay parents did not pose a risk to children's wellbeing.

[Link: Original Article]

Read More

Channel Seven - News Piece on Gay Adoption

[Link: Channel Seven]

Read More

The Sunday Times - "No joy for gay `dads'" by Braden Quartermaine

THE first homosexual couple in WA approved an adoption are still waiting because no birth mother has wanted her child to have "two dads''.
Liberalised laws introduced by the Labor Government in 2002 allow same-sex couples to adopt children if they can convince authorities they would make suitable parents.

The Department for Community Development approved the couple's application about three years ago, but so far no birth mother has chosen to give her child to them.

The two men may never become fathers because under the law a child's birth parents also have to approve the new parents.

Gay and Lesbian Equality WA convenor Rod Swift said people should accept that already there were gay and lesbian mothers and fathers in the community, and same-sex couples were making excellent parents.

"Gay and lesbian couples now see that parenting is something they do want to do,'' he said.

"There are more and more people choosing to conceive.

"It's not something they're choosing like they go out and get a pet; it's something they are actively thinking quite responsibly about.

"The fact that they're gay or lesbian is irrelevant to their ability to parent, in fact most are fantastic parents.''

The so-far-childless gay couple aren't receiving any sympathy from Australian Family Association WA Branch president John Barich, who was thrilled they had not been given a child yet.

Mr Barich said it would be cruel to the child and it was only natural that a birth mother would choose a man and a woman, rather than two men, to be parents to her child.

"We're very glad, we predicted it,'' he said.

"A child is not goods to pass around, and the child doesn't get to give his or her opinion until it's too late -- then he finds out he's got two dads.

"Having children is not a right, it's something nature gives you.

"Nature hasn't given it to them -- therefore they ought to desist and dedicate themselves some other way to humanity.

"Playing mothers and fathers is obviously not what is meant for them.''

But Mr Swift said: "When the Australian Family Association and other conservative groups turn around and say it's cruel to children not to give them a mother and a father, they don't realise they're living in some sort of utopian fantasy land.''

The Liberal Party strongly opposed the introduction of legislation allowing adoption by gay couples, but is not committing to repealing the laws if it returns to power in WA.

"We are yet to discuss any possible changes to the legislation under a Liberal government,'' Opposition Leader Paul Omodei said.

The Department for Community Development said no same-sex couple had applied to adopt since the historic first approval.

[Link: Original Article]

Read More

The Sunday Times - "Gay dads' agony: Adoption battle still in limbo, three years on" by Trevor Paddenburg

A GAY couple, the first to be given approval to adopt a child in WA, are still waiting to become parents.
The male couple were given approval by the Department for Community Development in 2003. Three years later, their dream of becoming parents is in limbo.

The two gay men are among 112 couples on a waiting list to adopt a child in WA. Most wait an average of two years for a child, according to the department.

The couple were the first to be approved in WA under controversial laws passed in 2002, which allow same-sex couples to adopt children if they can convince authorities they would make suitable parents. It is the same criteria used for heterosexual couples.

But WA's laws also give relinquishing parents a say in who the new parents will be – meaning the gay couple may never be accepted.

The couple cannot adopt an overseas child because no other country accepts applications from same-sex couples.

The issue has polarised politicians and the community since The Sunday Times last year revealed the couple had been given approval to adopt.

Australian Family Association WA president John Barich said allowing the couple to adopt was an "obscene" social experiment. He was glad the couple were still on a waiting list.

"We don't know how these kids are going to grow up and we're not entitled to impose that on a child – it's a social experiment," Mr Barich said. "Kids need a mum and a dad. That's the natural way.

"There are so many heterosexual couples who are desperate for a child to adopt, and instead, we're going to give a child to two gays or two lesbians. It's just weird. It doesn't make any sense."

Former Opposition leader Matt Birney also disapproves, saying it was disappointing, disturbing and against a child's best interests.

Greens MP Giz Watson, a lesbian whose partner of 17 years has three children, said critics of gay adoption were out of touch.

She was disappointed the couple had not yet been given a child because sexuality had no bearing on being a good parent.

[Link: Original Article]

Read More

The Sunday Times - "Gay adoption splits opinion" by Giz Watson & John Barich

State MP Giz Watson and John Barich, national vice-president of the Australian Family Association, put their cases on the issue of allowing gay couples to adopt

GIZ WATSON, the case for . . .

TWO men have exercised their rights under WA law to be considered as prospective parents of a child who needs a new family, a child who has been relinquished for adoption.
Their chances of becoming parents in this way are slight. There are already more than 100 other couples on the waiting list; in 2003/04 only three children born in WA were placed in so-called "stranger adoption".

Other countries offering children for adoption prevent children from going to same-sex couples; and the relinquishing mother can (quite rightly) limit or proscribe who the child goes to (for example, she can say they have to be Catholics or Caucasian).

Under WA law, in the case of stranger adoption, the interest of the child always comes first and the decisions of the relinquishing parent and the adoption service are final. Neither a heterosexual nor gay couple discriminated against for good reason in this process can appeal. These decisions cannot be appealed under the Equal Opportunity Act.

So why all the excitement? What exactly is behind this debate?

Are lesbian and gay parents less capable? The scientific evidence is to the contrary and more than 50 scientific studies have shown this.

The Australian Psychological Society, representing more than 15,000 psychologists, says that gays and lesbians parent no differently from heterosexuals.

Jenny Milbank, of Sydney University, reviewed the last 30 years of research on lesbian and gay families. She concluded that it was family processes, not family structures, that determined children's welfare. Parenting skills and the management of stress and conflict determined dysfunction in children, and these were completely unrelated to gender or family structure.

Are children in gay families in any danger? Statistics from Australia and other countries show that children are more likely to suffer neglect or abuse in heterosexual families.

The facts are that more than 90 per cent of the perpetrators of child abuse are men who identify as heterosexual – overwhelmingly their victims are female, the majority are related or known to their victim, and most offences occur inside the hallowed family home. Of course, the vast majority of heterosexual families provide safe and loving homes for children, and gay families do so equally.

Will children in gay families be teased or bullied at school? Children may be teased for having big ears or a bald father, or for being thin.

Parents and schools are fully aware of bullying issues and employ intelligent approaches to conflict resolution. Teasing is a behaviour-management issue, not a "gay-parent" issue.

One of the key tools to address teasing is promoting understanding and tolerance.

So is it really a "rights of the child" issue that excites all the fuss? Opponents of gay adoption remain adamant that a gay-family structure is damaging – but to whom? Why does the institution of the heterosexual family require such vehement defence?

Is it really true that a child's best interests are necessarily served by having a mother and a father? An optimal home environment for a child provides both nurturing and resourcing. These roles are not gender specific.

So, finally, what arguments are left other than a bald, unsubstantiated assertion that heterosexual families are simply best for children? Is the "threat" of gay adoption not really about the "best interests of the child", but rather its perceived challenge to a narrow, imagined notion of an ideal family?

Since time immemorial the true, rather than imagined, reality is that children have been raised in a variety of settings. One person or many may provide the nurturing and resourcing roles: family members, friends and teachers all contribute. Opponents of gay adoption would do well to take a longer and wider view of child-raising in the world, and, frankly, get over it.

JOHN BARICH, the case against . . .

THE 1994 Adoption Act declares that the "paramount considerations to be taken into account in the administration" of that Act are "the welfare and best interests of a child who is an adoptee or a prospective adoptee; the principle that adoption is a service for a child who is an adoptee or a prospective adoptee; and the adoption of a child should occur only in circumstances where there is no other appropriate alternative for the child".

Nothing in these considerations refers to any alleged "right" of couples, of any kind, to adopt.

Therefore, the question of whether a homosexual couple should be treated equally to a married couple does not arise, except in the context of asking what is in the best interest of the child.

The onus is on those advocating adoption by homosexual couples to establish that the best interest of a child can ever be served by intentionally depriving the child of a father or a mother.

This is the necessary consequence of placing a child for adoption with a male homosexual couple or a lesbian couple.

Advocates of adoption by homosexual couples frequently claim about 50 studies have shown no difference in outcome between children raised by married or homosexual couples.

Any social-science study depends for its validity on following rigorous statistical and research procedures.

Dr Robert Lerner and Dr Althea Nagai – experts in quantitative analysis – after dissecting each of 49 of such studies, found at least one fatal research flaw in each.

These studies are therefore no basis for good science or public policy.

On the other hand, there is a large and reliable body of evidence that there are gender-linked differences in parenting skills.

Men and women add different strengths to their children's development.

Fathers and mothers interact differently with their infant children.

Fathers tend to play with their children more physically, while mothers smile and talk more to them.

Fathers tend to encourage curiosity and problem solving and are less solicitous about failure.

Mothers provide more expressive and nurturing child-rearing.

What a perverse idea of fairness is it to decide that a little boy or girl shall never be able to call anyone "Mummy" because the next couple in the adoption queue is a pair of male homosexuals?

Adoption creates a legal, lifelong bond between a child and the new parents.

It provides a vital service to those children whose natural parents freely decide that they are unable or unwilling to care for and raise them.

The state has a grave obligation to ensure that it acts only in the best interests of these children and ignores the self-serving interests of any adults demanding a "right to adopt".

Millennia of human experience, common sense and weighty research support the presumption that the best interest of the child is served by entrusting him or her to a mother and father in a stable marriage.

The advocates of adoption by homosexual couples cannot meet the burden of proof required to rebut this presumption.

The Australian Family Association welcomes the commitment of the Liberal Party to repeal the unjust provision of the Act that permits adoption by homosexual couples.

This provision was introduced by the Gallop Government – not after any comprehensive review of the needs of children, but on demands for equality from a small, influential group of adults.

We urge the Gallop Government to likewise consider repealing this provision.

[Link: Original Article]

Read More

The Sunday Times - "GAY COUPLE TO ADOPT: Two WA men approved as parents" by Trevor Paddenburg

A GAY couple have been approved to adopt a child – a WA first under liberalised laws that came into force in 2002.
The application, by a male couple, has been approved by the Department for Community Development.

The historic laws allow same-sex couples to adopt children if they can convince authorities they would make suitable parents – the same criteria for heterosexual couples.

The gay partners are among 118 WA couples approved to adopt a child, most of whom will wait an average of two years.

But the two men may never become fathers because a child's birth mother also has to approve the foster parents.

Opposition Leader Matt Birney slammed the department's decision, saying it was disappointing, disturbing and against a child's best interests.

He said the debate about same-sex parents had been "hijacked" by a focus on the rights of gay parents rather than the rights of children.

"I can't support it. I find it very disappointing and I think most people out there would find this quite disturbing," he said.

Mr Birney said every child deserved to grow up with the influence of a mother and a father.

"Out in the real world, you don't always have that opportunity, but in this case the Government can provide that opportunity," he said.

"Instead, they are imposing their own political ideology on the system and denying a child the best start in life he or she could have."

Australian Family Association WA branch president John Barich described the liberal laws as obscene, anti-social and against the community's wishes.

But Greens MP Giz Watson, a lesbian whose partner of 16 years has three children, said critics of gay adoption were old-fashioned and ill-informed.

She said it was good news the gay couple had taken advantage of the changed laws because sex and sexuality had no bearing on being a good parent.

"There are many examples of same-sex couples raising children in a healthy, loving and stable home environment," she said.

"The main thing to recognise is that a stable, loving couple provide the best environment for children, and gay couples are just as capable as heterosexual couples of providing that."

Despite adoption approval here, the gay couple cannot adopt a foreign child because no other country accepts applications from same-sex couples.

In WA, relinquishing mothers have to give their tick of approval to potential foster parents.

Department for Community Development acting adoptions manager Bob Sprenkels said it meant the gay couple could be "chosen at any time or may never be chosen".

Ms Watson agreed that relinquishing parents should have the final say on who could adopt their child.

But gay couples should be considered on the same terms as heterosexual couples, she said.

[Link: Original Article]

Read More

The Age - "Howard slams ACT gay adoption law"

Prime Minister John Howard has spoken out against an ACT law which allows homosexual couples to adopt children.

Federal cabinet was reported to be considering overturning the law, which was passed last month by the ACT Legislative Assembly.

The federal parliament has the power to override territory laws and in 1997 overturned a Northern Territory law which legalised voluntary euthanasia.

Mr Howard said he did not support the ACT gay adoption law.

"I don't support gay adoption, no," Mr Howard told the John Laws radio program.

"I'm against gay adoption, just as I'm against gay marriage.

"I think there are certain benchmark institutions and arrangements in our society that you don't muck around with.

"Children ideally should be brought up by a mother and a father who are married. That's the ideal."

Mr Howard said he knew unmarried couples could be good and loving parents, but the best conditions for children were to be raised by married parents.

"I believe in the maximum conditions of stability for people who have children," he said.

"I think it is incredibly important that people have role models of both sexes."

Mr Howard has previously written to the ACT's Labor Chief Minister Jon Stanhope expressing concerns about gay adoption and the territory's bill of rights.

Mr Stanhope said he believed Mr Howard was bluffing and would not intervene to overturn ACT laws.

"I can't believe that the prime minister would seriously think it appropriate for the Commonwealth to intervene in the ACT's affairs to overturn some fairly basic human rights legislation," Mr Stanhope told ABC radio.

Federal Labor leader Mark Latham has said he will oppose any move to overturn the gay adoption law.

[Link: Original Article]

Read More