Adoption bill passed
The last hurdle to same-sex adoption in NSW was leaped last Thursday when the Legislative Council approved Sydney MP Clover Moore’s Adoption Amendment (Same-Sex Couples) Bill as amended by the Legislative Assembly earlier that day.
The Assembly voted 46-43 in favour of an amendment by Attorney General John Hatzistergos which sought to restrict the scope of Rockdale MP Frank Sartor’s amendment of the previous day.
Sartor’s amendment exempted the Anti-Discrimination Act from applying to the Adoption Act except where it covered children. That was further refined in Hatzistergos’ amendment so it would only apply to religious-run adoption agencies.
The bill passed the Legislative Assembly the previous week in a vote of 45 to 43 while MLCs voted 22-15 for the bill. Greens MLCs supported the bill unanimously. Most Labor parliamentarians voted for the bill, which also found support from Liberal and Nationals MLAs and MLCs.
The Nationals’ Andrew Stoner was the only leader of a party with representation in both Houses to oppose the bill. Both Premier Kristina Keneally and Opposition leader Barry O’Farrell spoke in favour of it.
Responding to the win, Clover Moore declared the NSW Parliament now “less than 50 percent homophobic”.
“This is a historic win as adoption is the last major discrimination in state law, and I congratulate the gay and lesbian community on successfully changing community attitudes,” Moore told Sydney Star Observer.
“Parliament has come a long way since I presented this legislation 10 years ago when not one MP supported me, but we still have a way to go with cultural change to celebrate diversity and acceptance instead of promoting fear and prejudice.”
Moore said she believed no organisation should be able to legally discriminate, but she supported amendments to allow faith-based agencies to refuse adoption services to same-sex couples to ensure the bill’s passage.
The NSW Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby welcomed the reform while the Australian Coalition for Equality hoped same-sex couple adoption in NSW would put pressure on states yet to reform their laws.
GLRL convenor Kellie McDonald said she was very pleased that Parliament acted in the best interests of children by ensuring they were able to have two legally recognised parents, regardless of their family structure.
“We strongly support the rights of birth parents to determine the best family for their child,” McDonald said.
“It will be interesting to see Victoria’s reaction to this given that a recommendation to proceed on this has been sitting on its books since 2007,” ACE spokesman Corey Irlam said.
With surrogacy, the reality of what is going on out there is that although commercial surrogacy within Australia is illegal, many more people entering surrogacy arrangements are going overseas to enter into commercial arrangements. Our laws, including proposed laws, does not address this reality.
Now when will the NSW Government stop fart-fiddling about and hurry-up and just introduce the Surrogacy Bill 2010 to the NSW parliament already????
Both Barry O’Farrell And Kristina Keneally say there will be a “conscientious vote” once the bill is introduced.
This proposed law will allow gay men to become fathers by asking women (without payment) the right to bear a child as “commissioning parents” – the same law that got introduced in Queensland earlier this year!!!!!
I fully agree that “commercial surrogacy” should still be illegal – but NOT “altruistic” surrogacy!!!!!
It is now finally become law on the NSW website after the dreaded “ping-pong” stage (amendment after amendment on the bill in the two Houses). The Lieutenant-Governor the Honourable James Jacob Spigelman “assented” the bill on Wednesday 15 September 2010. So that means it is now law (Act No 66 of 2010 Private Member’s Public Bill)!!!!
http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/nswbills.nsf/V3BillsListAssented
“Section 2 of the bill quotes: “This Act becomes effective on the date of assent” – thank goodness it does not “become effective on the date of proclamation” – or we will be still waiting for equality!!!!!
finally!!! thanks for the reporting to the observer!!!!
We allow mass killers to have children, even the guy who rapes your wife and burns your house. But God help us if two loving people who contribute to the community want to provide a safe loving home, for a child that would normally spend a life in an institution. The focus should be on the ability of someone to provide a good loving home, not the bloody sexuality!
Judith Bond is a gay-hating hack from way back. I think she’s with the Christian Democrats or Australian Family Association (or both). She seems to have a morbid obsession with the personal lives of gay people. Now that this bill has become legislation it is worth the GLRL’s while to monitor the activities of such groups because I doubt that they’re going to give up and let the new laws stand.
One of the labor ministers who voted against same sex adoption is being challenged in his own electorate over his vote
Judith Bond of Glen Alpine – some lady who hates the fact that there are gay lifesavers tries to back up the minister
http://www.macarthuradvertiser.com.au/news/local/news/general/west-slammed-over-samesex-adoption-vote/1942323.aspx
My understanding was the bill was passed with a further amendment that the parents ‘could’ ultimately chose.
>>The amendment, made by Planning Minister Frank Sartor, frees up adoption agencies to act on the wishes of parents regarding where their children are adopted.
Which is not unreasonable.
No-one, gay or straight, is compelled to give up their children for adoption. The child welfare authority can intervene and seek to place a child into foster care if the child is at risk of his/her parents, but that is different to adoption. I think this “debate” about so-called rights of the parents giving up their child for adoption is getting rather silly. The legislation exempts faith based organisations from facilitating adoption to same sex couples, which I agree is a cop-out. But it doesn’t give parents who are giving up their child for adoption any right to choose who can adopt the child. The adoption legislation is based upon the best interests of the child principle. Both sides of the “debate” are getting distracted by the discrimination argument, and are missing the point.
Thank you SSO staff for such good coverage.
Gay parents who are compelled to give their children up for adoption should also have the right to select the characteristics of the adopting parents.
Apparently people who have been adopted out have to reconcile the decision of their birth parents to put them up for adoption.
If the children of gay parents are adopted by homophobic people those homophobic people could adversely influence the ability of the adopted person to reconcile the decision of their birth parents.
Parents of gay children who are compelled to give up their children for adoption should also have the right to select the characteristics of the adopting parents.
It would be an horrific experience for a gay child to be adopted by homophobic parents.
The situation would be aggravated by the presence of heterosexual children as step brothers and sisters.
The adopted child would only ever know hatred and persecution.
Point taken, Nick. This website converts the letters of some words to what looks like an incryption. That explains my mistake.
Responding to the win, Clover Moore declared the NSW Parliament now “less than 50 percent homophobic”.
Less than
Like most gays I’m really happy this legislation got through (even though I personally don’t want to adopt children – the sun would rise in the West before that would happen). And I congratulate Clover Moore for her great work.
But why did Moore have to say declare the NSW Parliament more than 50 percent homophobic? Tactically, it is better to be positive and to foster relations with those who did vote for the legislation – especially more conservative members whose vote may have surprised. That way, a wedge can be driven between liberal Liberals, their ALP counterparts on the one hand and the homophobes on the other (with the strategy of isolating the latter).
Calling NSW MPs a bunch of homophobes may be tempting but not good politics.