Those who read the book know it ends with a desperate attempt by some members of the European Parliament to re-open Romanian adoption - going as far as proposing European Adoptions: A european market for children.
MEPs Jean-Marie Cavada and Claire Gibault (who were alerted to this issue by Francois de Combret) had their way, as the European Parliament adopted a Resolution on European Adoptions and have now teamed up with the Council of Europe, who not long ago pleaded for easier adoptions.
TOMORROW IS THEIR JOINT PRESS CONFERENCE:
Strasbourg, 12.02.2008 – Despite the considerable volume of content of legal provisions on national and international adoption, the best interests of the child do not always take precedence over other considerations. Nevertheless, these legal arrangements decide the future of thousands of orphans and abandoned children every year.
Convinced of the need to create an adoption procedure common to all EU member states – in line with the recent adoption of a report on children’s rights calling for such a mechanism – and to encourage international adoption where there is no national solution, a number of Members of the European Parliament, together with the Deputy Secretary General of the Council of Europe, have drawn up a joint declaration addressed to European ministers responsible for family affairs.
Jean-Marie Cavada (ALDE, France), Claire Gibault (ALDE, France) and Maud de Boer-Buquicchio, Deputy Secretary General of the Council of Europe, would like to invite you to a press conference at 3pm on Tuesday 19 February in the European Parliament press room (LOW) in Strasbourg where they will present this initiative.
Full text: Towards a European Procedure for Adoption
Or in French: Pour une procédure européenne d'adoption
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Free Counter and Web Stats
1 comment:
European Adoptions in the best interest of the child?
By Brian Douglas.
Jean-Marie Cavada (ALDE, France), Claire Gibault (ALDE, France) and Maud de Boer-Buquicchio, Deputy Secretary General of the Council of Europe have arranged a press conference on the 19th of February 2008 titled ‘Towards a European procedure for adoption’ to be held in the European Parliament press room in Strasbourg where they will present their initiative.
The three Europeans state that the rights of the child are not always adhered to in Europe and I certainly agree with them in this respect but they must realize that they themselves in calling for European adoptions are in fact themselves not putting the rights of the child first either.
They completely fail to mention that Foster care which is available throughout Europe including in Romania as a viable option for children in need of care, yet this very option is the best option even above national adoption in many cases considering that the largest amount of “orphans and abandoned children” have living parents or relatives who in most cases would love their child back if their social circumstances were improved to allow this. Here the individual member states have a huge part to play, as does the profitable private sector and NGOs who are committed to work in the child’s best interest in this important area and observe best practices at all times.
If we really look at the child’s best interests then what would be better than to have a child who was in difficulties because of family poverty to be given the chance of a local foster care placement in their local area, so they could still go to the local school, have special counseling and most important not loose contact with their biological family in this time. Here local authorities could swing into action and ensure that the family who needed help got it so that their situation could improve enough to have their child back home and know that in this time their child was safe and in good care, plus in a local area were they could visit and even if agreed take their child out for the day. All of this would be of greater benefit to a child in such a situation than to consider adoption in my opinion as the child would be still an active part of its own community and still have the love of its biological parents as well as the help of foster parents to overcome its difficulties in a kind sympathetic manner. The same can be applied to children whose parents are deceased but have relatives who need help to adapt and time to be counseled to have the child at home, and perhaps some financial assistance.
In such cases too when I speak of the private sector it is clear that they have a huge part to play in society too and from their often massive profits they could give a little back. This could be done by providing school requesits including a school uniform for children in these situations of poverty free of charge once a year at least, so that the child can continue its education as an equal with its class mates and not feel humiliated through poverty. All of the above keeps the child’s interests above any other interests as childcare should always do.
Looking now at the child who just cant go home and here there are throughout Europe cases like this.( Perhaps parents deceased and no living relatives, perhaps parents a danger to child itself, perhaps in prison to give a few examples.)
Again here in the first place local foster care in a caring foster family with special training must be the first priority to asses the child’s needs in all areas and give the child a say also in its future depending on age and ability. This may mean long term foster care as opposed to perhaps short term foster care as mentioned above in the case of children with parents or relatives who with help can have their child back home.
It may well be that the child adapts to the foster family in its own locality, blossoms well, continues its education and in such a case if the child’s best interest are being adhered to why break the balance? In other cases such as this foster care depending on the individual situation and taking the child’s consideration into account it may be that the foster care is a stepping stone to national adoption and I would suggest that in many cases a local family would be willing to adopt so that the child could continue to live in its own community. But of course only where this would be in the child’s best interest to chance its identity.
And for some older children, family-type homes will be the appropriate way to prepare them for independent living.
All of the above is far better than international adoptions as proposed by the three Europeans, which is what is masked behind European adoptions.
One must ask the question if Francois de Combret is behind this European adoption idea considering that the idea is being proposed by Jean Marie Cavada and Claire Gibault? Clearly, though they portray this idea as an ALDE idea, the reality is that ALDE members may not all be fully in support of such a scheme in Europe.
I note with particular interest the political agenda of Amici dei Bambini, which shows the real intentions behind this European adoption idea, which is to re-open Intercountry adoptions in countries like Romania that no longer need such practices. See below:
The new frontiers of placement: kafalah, European adoption and international placement
a new level of intervention to be realised between states of the European Union in order to allow the placement in families of abandoned children from Italy, France, Spain or Romania, who today find themselves in institutions and have only two alternatives: national adoption or international adoption. The entry of Romania and Bulgaria in Europe, countries that de facto have blocked international adoption, imposes the necessity to define adequate solutions for the insertion of these minors in families. This way the concept of subsidiarity of adoption could be widened. Placing itself, in fact, between the national and the international one, European adoption is necessary in order to resolve the problems of abandoned children in case it is impossible to find a national one. Only when one cannot recur to national adoption or to European adoption, one would refer to international adoption as configured nowadays.
Their wording is cleverly disguised, as is the wording of the press conference invitation of the 3 MEPs because for certain they know that Spain, France and Italy would never allow its children to be adopted say by a Romanian family!
The real incentive here is to pressure for Romania to open ICA again and there is absolutely no need for such an action as clearly if one accepts the above written options of Foster care and National adoption it can be clearly seen they offer the best interests of the child.
Post a Comment