How Did England And Australia Get Their Adoption Laws Changed?

What was the event that made preserving the natural family so important in these countries and what can Americans do to create an adoption reform that is similar to England’s and Australia’s adoption laws?

Tags: , , , , ,

6 Responses to “How Did England And Australia Get Their Adoption Laws Changed?”

  1. SLY Says:

    In Aus, there was an investigation into the removal of the aboriginal children from their homes and the attempt to assimilate them. There was a movie about it, Rabbit Proof Fences. It was shameful and the government’s hand was forced. Then Di Wellfare and some other mothers who had lost their children to adoption during the BSE, formed what eventually became Origins. Their demands for a Parliamentary Inquiry were eventually recognized and an official apology was issued.
    The major difference between the US and the other countries is that we have a free market economy and the govt. is very reluctant to interfere in industry, which adoption is in the United States. Not only is it an industry, it is a thriving one. What is a little thing like justice if it interferes with profits?
    To me, it seems that the key to getting some similar recognition of the criminal things done to women to coerce them from their babies is to expose the BSE/EMS and the things done to the mothers of that time. That is the time when it was done to HUGE numbers of women, 90% of all unmarried pregnancies. It defies reason that that many young, healthy women would willingly line up to give away their newborns. There HAD to be criminal violations of human and civil rights in order to obtain what amounts to 2-6 million surrenders in a relatively short time.
    Ann Fessler has done a lot to bring a light to that time period with her book, The Girls Who Went Away. I believe that her film will do the same. I sincerely hope so. To me, the BSE/EMS is the key to overturning the whole thing!

  2. Pip Says:

    For a start private adoption was made illegal in the late 1950′s/earlier 1960′s. Also it has never been about money as adoption agencies evolved from charitable organisations such as churches and Barnardo’s so adoptive parents generally only have to worry about court costs which are £140 and maybe an admin fee to the adoption agency but not many charge that and is still an affordable amount. Single mothers have had more support from family these days and the govenment in the form of benefits. All mothers are entitled to child benefit regardless of whether they are single, married, have a partner, working or unemployed. If they are unemployed and single they get unemployment benefit, housing benefit and council tax benefit. If they are single or married and working they can get other benefits if their wages are low.
    The system isn’t perfect here but far fewer coercive/forced adoptions of newborns are going through which is good news.

  3. H****** Says:

    They listened to the research and facts; and acted accordingly. Something the US legislators are refusing to do. There is a huge lobby effort on the part of adoption agencies who band together to lobby against change (they fear it will affect ‘business’ I guess)
    I’m wondering how many adoptive parents who believe in honesty and openness in adoption realize that the agency they adopted thru most likely has paid lobbyists fighting against change . . .

  4. Lizz Says:

    The reason Aussie Laws are the way they are is because of the Stolen Generation, the Stolen Generation was a generation of Aussie Aboriginals that were taken from there familys and put into halfway houses and then adopted out. some were just used for slave labour, my father knew one of the last groups of children from the stollen generation and they where basicly kept on a farm to work. although they did get a little schooling. watch rabbit proof fence its a great movie and a moving story

  5. Randy B Says:

    Lourdes, Canada and the US also share legal systems that are based on British Common Law traditions and our adoption laws are different from both “mother England” and Australia. Your argument and your observation has no merit.

  6. lourdes r Says:

    i say that there will not be a big change because aussie was under the English rule for a long time before becoming independent

Leave a Reply

Powered by Yahoo! Answers