News from the EU

Latest EU resolution on adoption - missed opportunity for better safeguards

Whilst the 2011 resolution contains some advances, it sadly resembles more of a concoction of various notions, which are at times erroneous and could lead to fewer protections for children.

The EU resolution B7‑0030/2011 on abandoned children and international adoption¹ makes some headway in reminding member States of their responsibilities in this field, by recalling the main international and regional standards in place; it rightly gives primacy to THC-93, the best interests of the child and the need to provide more post-adoption support. Unfortunately the resolution includes references to standards that are outdated (e.g.: UNICEF position on intercountry adoption 2004 instead of 2010), are missing altogether (e.g.: reference to UN Guidelines on the Alternative Care of Children 2009), and contains incorrect facts, which could create greater harm than benefits for children as discussed below.

Flawed facts could lead to breaches of rights

The Resolution states that "the number of international adoptions, globally, has nearly doubled each year", whereas actually, since 2004, the figures have been declining (see Monthly Review 10/2010). Such statements can create confusion about the growing need for intercountry adoptions and why waiting times are so long.

As a second illustration, it requires that "all principles of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child are upheld wherever possible", which lowers the benchmark for its full application in all situations.

Another worrying case in point is the statement encouraging 'Member States to act expeditiously in the processing of adoption applications, in furtherance of the Hague Convention in order that the child may enjoy the full rights and effects of their adoption without undue delay'. Without precise clarification that all procedures in THC-93 must be respected, this could be read to mean that certain essential safeguards may be skipped, in order that the child can be relocated as quickly as possible, as was the case in Haiti (e.g.: verification of adoptability and consent). Yet the ISS/IRC recalls that "to expedite" is "to act expeditiously" when undertaking a task or procedure, making it as fast and efficient as possible, with no undue delay, while respecting the rules and process that the proper accomplishment of the task or procedure imply."²

What could have been…

This Resolution could have been an innovative tool to challenge the 27 EU member States to better protect children deprived of their family, especially those, most in need of an adoption abroad. For instance, the resolution could have included a clause requiring the provision of resources for preventing the abandonment of children, implementation of more re-integration measures and national adoptions. Moreover, the resolution could have encouraged the adoption of children with special needs (e.g.: older, sibling groups and those with disabilities), the group for which it is most difficult to find national solutions.

The ISS/IRC believes that the resolution is a missed opportunity for advancing the rights of children. It does not appear that there was wide consultation during the drafting stages, with experts, such as, the Hague Conference, UNICEF and civil society, who ideally would have provided clearer direction. One can only hope that the aforementioned considerations will be taken on board in future resolutions.

¹http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=MOTION&reference=B7-2011-0030&language=EN

² http://www.iss-ssi.org/2009/assets/files/Haiti%20ISS%20final-%20foreword.pdf