❓ Mr. Birney questions the Attorney General on whether adoption legislation allows discrimination against gay couples by birth parents, undermining the government's anti-discrimination agenda. The Attorney General confirms that the legislation does allow for such discrimination, prioritizing the wishes of the birth mother.
AnsweredQoN 654Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
ADOPTION BY GAY AND LESBIAN COUPLES, RELINQUISHING PARENTS’ RIGHTS
I refer to the Attorney General’s comments in this House yesterday about the legal right of the birth parents of a child up for adoption to reject a gay couple’s attempt to adopt that child, when he stated that the legislation will allow discrimination in those circumstances. (1) Will the Attorney General allow the relinquishing parent to discriminate against an applicant solely on the basis of the applicant’s homosexuality? (2) Does that not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY
I refer to the Attorney General’s comments in this House yesterday about the legal right of the birth parents of a child up for adoption to reject a gay couple’s attempt to adopt that child, when he stated that the legislation will allow discrimination in those circumstances. (1) Will the Attorney General allow the relinquishing parent to discriminate against an applicant solely on the basis of the applicant’s homosexuality? (2) Does that not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) The short answer is yes. Mr Birney: It does make a mockery of the Government’s agenda. Mr McGINTY: The legislation will allow discrimination in the case of placement of an adoptee to give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. The current law provides that the director general of the Department for Community Development is responsible for the placement of adoptees. Mr Birney: Why not repeal it? It is discriminatory. Mr McGINTY: Only one criterion is applied when placing an adoptee; that is, the welfare of that child. The Government will move amendments to further enhance that criterion. The director general must give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother, unless that is not practical. There is an overriding imperative. If a child is not wanted by his or her birth mother, the department must ask the mother what she wants. If she expresses a discriminatory view about the placement of her child - for example, she might want the child placed with a Muslim family, in the city or with a gay couple - effect will be given to her wishes. The Government is further strengthening that process by amending the Equal Opportunity Act to ensure that, because the criterion is the welfare of the child, the decision cannot be called into question before the Equal Opportunity Commission on the basis of discrimination. The member’s point is that that is discriminatory. The Adoption Act provides that the adopting parent cannot be over the age of 40. That is discrimination on the basis of age. Section 52 of the Act refers to the placement of the child in culturally appropriate circumstances that will enable that child to continue his or her education and cultural development and so on. That is discrimination. The legislation contains a prohibition on certain classes of people, regardless of their parenting skills, being considered as adoptive parents. The Government proposes to remove that prohibition. The only consideration will be who are the best parents for a child, taking into account the wishes of the relinquishing parent. Broadening the range of people who are eligible to adopt will enable the director general of the Department for Community Development to make the best decision about who will provide the best family and the best parenting. That is the purpose of the legislation. Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
(1) Will the Attorney General allow the relinquishing parent to discriminate against an applicant solely on the basis of the applicant’s homosexuality? (2) Does that not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) The short answer is yes. Mr Birney: It does make a mockery of the Government’s agenda. Mr McGINTY: The legislation will allow discrimination in the case of placement of an adoptee to give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. The current law provides that the director general of the Department for Community Development is responsible for the placement of adoptees. Mr Birney: Why not repeal it? It is discriminatory. Mr McGINTY: Only one criterion is applied when placing an adoptee; that is, the welfare of that child. The Government will move amendments to further enhance that criterion. The director general must give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother, unless that is not practical. There is an overriding imperative. If a child is not wanted by his or her birth mother, the department must ask the mother what she wants. If she expresses a discriminatory view about the placement of her child - for example, she might want the child placed with a Muslim family, in the city or with a gay couple - effect will be given to her wishes. The Government is further strengthening that process by amending the Equal Opportunity Act to ensure that, because the criterion is the welfare of the child, the decision cannot be called into question before the Equal Opportunity Commission on the basis of discrimination. The member’s point is that that is discriminatory. The Adoption Act provides that the adopting parent cannot be over the age of 40. That is discrimination on the basis of age. Section 52 of the Act refers to the placement of the child in culturally appropriate circumstances that will enable that child to continue his or her education and cultural development and so on. That is discrimination. The legislation contains a prohibition on certain classes of people, regardless of their parenting skills, being considered as adoptive parents. The Government proposes to remove that prohibition. The only consideration will be who are the best parents for a child, taking into account the wishes of the relinquishing parent. Broadening the range of people who are eligible to adopt will enable the director general of the Department for Community Development to make the best decision about who will provide the best family and the best parenting. That is the purpose of the legislation. Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
(2) Does that not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) The short answer is yes. Mr Birney: It does make a mockery of the Government’s agenda. Mr McGINTY: The legislation will allow discrimination in the case of placement of an adoptee to give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. The current law provides that the director general of the Department for Community Development is responsible for the placement of adoptees. Mr Birney: Why not repeal it? It is discriminatory. Mr McGINTY: Only one criterion is applied when placing an adoptee; that is, the welfare of that child. The Government will move amendments to further enhance that criterion. The director general must give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother, unless that is not practical. There is an overriding imperative. If a child is not wanted by his or her birth mother, the department must ask the mother what she wants. If she expresses a discriminatory view about the placement of her child - for example, she might want the child placed with a Muslim family, in the city or with a gay couple - effect will be given to her wishes. The Government is further strengthening that process by amending the Equal Opportunity Act to ensure that, because the criterion is the welfare of the child, the decision cannot be called into question before the Equal Opportunity Commission on the basis of discrimination. The member’s point is that that is discriminatory. The Adoption Act provides that the adopting parent cannot be over the age of 40. That is discrimination on the basis of age. Section 52 of the Act refers to the placement of the child in culturally appropriate circumstances that will enable that child to continue his or her education and cultural development and so on. That is discrimination. The legislation contains a prohibition on certain classes of people, regardless of their parenting skills, being considered as adoptive parents. The Government proposes to remove that prohibition. The only consideration will be who are the best parents for a child, taking into account the wishes of the relinquishing parent. Broadening the range of people who are eligible to adopt will enable the director general of the Department for Community Development to make the best decision about who will provide the best family and the best parenting. That is the purpose of the legislation. Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) The short answer is yes. Mr Birney: It does make a mockery of the Government’s agenda. Mr McGINTY: The legislation will allow discrimination in the case of placement of an adoptee to give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. The current law provides that the director general of the Department for Community Development is responsible for the placement of adoptees. Mr Birney: Why not repeal it? It is discriminatory. Mr McGINTY: Only one criterion is applied when placing an adoptee; that is, the welfare of that child. The Government will move amendments to further enhance that criterion. The director general must give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother, unless that is not practical. There is an overriding imperative. If a child is not wanted by his or her birth mother, the department must ask the mother what she wants. If she expresses a discriminatory view about the placement of her child - for example, she might want the child placed with a Muslim family, in the city or with a gay couple - effect will be given to her wishes. The Government is further strengthening that process by amending the Equal Opportunity Act to ensure that, because the criterion is the welfare of the child, the decision cannot be called into question before the Equal Opportunity Commission on the basis of discrimination. The member’s point is that that is discriminatory. The Adoption Act provides that the adopting parent cannot be over the age of 40. That is discrimination on the basis of age. Section 52 of the Act refers to the placement of the child in culturally appropriate circumstances that will enable that child to continue his or her education and cultural development and so on. That is discrimination. The legislation contains a prohibition on certain classes of people, regardless of their parenting skills, being considered as adoptive parents. The Government proposes to remove that prohibition. The only consideration will be who are the best parents for a child, taking into account the wishes of the relinquishing parent. Broadening the range of people who are eligible to adopt will enable the director general of the Department for Community Development to make the best decision about who will provide the best family and the best parenting. That is the purpose of the legislation. Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
(1)-(2) The short answer is yes. Mr Birney: It does make a mockery of the Government’s agenda. Mr McGINTY: The legislation will allow discrimination in the case of placement of an adoptee to give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. The current law provides that the director general of the Department for Community Development is responsible for the placement of adoptees. Mr Birney: Why not repeal it? It is discriminatory. Mr McGINTY: Only one criterion is applied when placing an adoptee; that is, the welfare of that child. The Government will move amendments to further enhance that criterion. The director general must give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother, unless that is not practical. There is an overriding imperative. If a child is not wanted by his or her birth mother, the department must ask the mother what she wants. If she expresses a discriminatory view about the placement of her child - for example, she might want the child placed with a Muslim family, in the city or with a gay couple - effect will be given to her wishes. The Government is further strengthening that process by amending the Equal Opportunity Act to ensure that, because the criterion is the welfare of the child, the decision cannot be called into question before the Equal Opportunity Commission on the basis of discrimination. The member’s point is that that is discriminatory. The Adoption Act provides that the adopting parent cannot be over the age of 40. That is discrimination on the basis of age. Section 52 of the Act refers to the placement of the child in culturally appropriate circumstances that will enable that child to continue his or her education and cultural development and so on. That is discrimination. The legislation contains a prohibition on certain classes of people, regardless of their parenting skills, being considered as adoptive parents. The Government proposes to remove that prohibition. The only consideration will be who are the best parents for a child, taking into account the wishes of the relinquishing parent. Broadening the range of people who are eligible to adopt will enable the director general of the Department for Community Development to make the best decision about who will provide the best family and the best parenting. That is the purpose of the legislation. Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr Birney: It does make a mockery of the Government’s agenda. Mr McGINTY: The legislation will allow discrimination in the case of placement of an adoptee to give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. The current law provides that the director general of the Department for Community Development is responsible for the placement of adoptees. Mr Birney: Why not repeal it? It is discriminatory. Mr McGINTY: Only one criterion is applied when placing an adoptee; that is, the welfare of that child. The Government will move amendments to further enhance that criterion. The director general must give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother, unless that is not practical. There is an overriding imperative. If a child is not wanted by his or her birth mother, the department must ask the mother what she wants. If she expresses a discriminatory view about the placement of her child - for example, she might want the child placed with a Muslim family, in the city or with a gay couple - effect will be given to her wishes. The Government is further strengthening that process by amending the Equal Opportunity Act to ensure that, because the criterion is the welfare of the child, the decision cannot be called into question before the Equal Opportunity Commission on the basis of discrimination. The member’s point is that that is discriminatory. The Adoption Act provides that the adopting parent cannot be over the age of 40. That is discrimination on the basis of age. Section 52 of the Act refers to the placement of the child in culturally appropriate circumstances that will enable that child to continue his or her education and cultural development and so on. That is discrimination. The legislation contains a prohibition on certain classes of people, regardless of their parenting skills, being considered as adoptive parents. The Government proposes to remove that prohibition. The only consideration will be who are the best parents for a child, taking into account the wishes of the relinquishing parent. Broadening the range of people who are eligible to adopt will enable the director general of the Department for Community Development to make the best decision about who will provide the best family and the best parenting. That is the purpose of the legislation. Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr McGINTY: The legislation will allow discrimination in the case of placement of an adoptee to give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. The current law provides that the director general of the Department for Community Development is responsible for the placement of adoptees. Mr Birney: Why not repeal it? It is discriminatory. Mr McGINTY: Only one criterion is applied when placing an adoptee; that is, the welfare of that child. The Government will move amendments to further enhance that criterion. The director general must give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother, unless that is not practical. There is an overriding imperative. If a child is not wanted by his or her birth mother, the department must ask the mother what she wants. If she expresses a discriminatory view about the placement of her child - for example, she might want the child placed with a Muslim family, in the city or with a gay couple - effect will be given to her wishes. The Government is further strengthening that process by amending the Equal Opportunity Act to ensure that, because the criterion is the welfare of the child, the decision cannot be called into question before the Equal Opportunity Commission on the basis of discrimination. The member’s point is that that is discriminatory. The Adoption Act provides that the adopting parent cannot be over the age of 40. That is discrimination on the basis of age. Section 52 of the Act refers to the placement of the child in culturally appropriate circumstances that will enable that child to continue his or her education and cultural development and so on. That is discrimination. The legislation contains a prohibition on certain classes of people, regardless of their parenting skills, being considered as adoptive parents. The Government proposes to remove that prohibition. The only consideration will be who are the best parents for a child, taking into account the wishes of the relinquishing parent. Broadening the range of people who are eligible to adopt will enable the director general of the Department for Community Development to make the best decision about who will provide the best family and the best parenting. That is the purpose of the legislation. Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr Birney: Why not repeal it? It is discriminatory. Mr McGINTY: Only one criterion is applied when placing an adoptee; that is, the welfare of that child. The Government will move amendments to further enhance that criterion. The director general must give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother, unless that is not practical. There is an overriding imperative. If a child is not wanted by his or her birth mother, the department must ask the mother what she wants. If she expresses a discriminatory view about the placement of her child - for example, she might want the child placed with a Muslim family, in the city or with a gay couple - effect will be given to her wishes. The Government is further strengthening that process by amending the Equal Opportunity Act to ensure that, because the criterion is the welfare of the child, the decision cannot be called into question before the Equal Opportunity Commission on the basis of discrimination. The member’s point is that that is discriminatory. The Adoption Act provides that the adopting parent cannot be over the age of 40. That is discrimination on the basis of age. Section 52 of the Act refers to the placement of the child in culturally appropriate circumstances that will enable that child to continue his or her education and cultural development and so on. That is discrimination. The legislation contains a prohibition on certain classes of people, regardless of their parenting skills, being considered as adoptive parents. The Government proposes to remove that prohibition. The only consideration will be who are the best parents for a child, taking into account the wishes of the relinquishing parent. Broadening the range of people who are eligible to adopt will enable the director general of the Department for Community Development to make the best decision about who will provide the best family and the best parenting. That is the purpose of the legislation. Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr McGINTY: Only one criterion is applied when placing an adoptee; that is, the welfare of that child. The Government will move amendments to further enhance that criterion. The director general must give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother, unless that is not practical. There is an overriding imperative. If a child is not wanted by his or her birth mother, the department must ask the mother what she wants. If she expresses a discriminatory view about the placement of her child - for example, she might want the child placed with a Muslim family, in the city or with a gay couple - effect will be given to her wishes. The Government is further strengthening that process by amending the Equal Opportunity Act to ensure that, because the criterion is the welfare of the child, the decision cannot be called into question before the Equal Opportunity Commission on the basis of discrimination. The member’s point is that that is discriminatory. The Adoption Act provides that the adopting parent cannot be over the age of 40. That is discrimination on the basis of age. Section 52 of the Act refers to the placement of the child in culturally appropriate circumstances that will enable that child to continue his or her education and cultural development and so on. That is discrimination. The legislation contains a prohibition on certain classes of people, regardless of their parenting skills, being considered as adoptive parents. The Government proposes to remove that prohibition. The only consideration will be who are the best parents for a child, taking into account the wishes of the relinquishing parent. Broadening the range of people who are eligible to adopt will enable the director general of the Department for Community Development to make the best decision about who will provide the best family and the best parenting. That is the purpose of the legislation. Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
The director general must give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother, unless that is not practical. There is an overriding imperative. If a child is not wanted by his or her birth mother, the department must ask the mother what she wants. If she expresses a discriminatory view about the placement of her child - for example, she might want the child placed with a Muslim family, in the city or with a gay couple - effect will be given to her wishes. The Government is further strengthening that process by amending the Equal Opportunity Act to ensure that, because the criterion is the welfare of the child, the decision cannot be called into question before the Equal Opportunity Commission on the basis of discrimination. The member’s point is that that is discriminatory. The Adoption Act provides that the adopting parent cannot be over the age of 40. That is discrimination on the basis of age. Section 52 of the Act refers to the placement of the child in culturally appropriate circumstances that will enable that child to continue his or her education and cultural development and so on. That is discrimination. The legislation contains a prohibition on certain classes of people, regardless of their parenting skills, being considered as adoptive parents. The Government proposes to remove that prohibition. The only consideration will be who are the best parents for a child, taking into account the wishes of the relinquishing parent. Broadening the range of people who are eligible to adopt will enable the director general of the Department for Community Development to make the best decision about who will provide the best family and the best parenting. That is the purpose of the legislation. Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
The member’s point is that that is discriminatory. The Adoption Act provides that the adopting parent cannot be over the age of 40. That is discrimination on the basis of age. Section 52 of the Act refers to the placement of the child in culturally appropriate circumstances that will enable that child to continue his or her education and cultural development and so on. That is discrimination. The legislation contains a prohibition on certain classes of people, regardless of their parenting skills, being considered as adoptive parents. The Government proposes to remove that prohibition. The only consideration will be who are the best parents for a child, taking into account the wishes of the relinquishing parent. Broadening the range of people who are eligible to adopt will enable the director general of the Department for Community Development to make the best decision about who will provide the best family and the best parenting. That is the purpose of the legislation. Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
(1) Will the Attorney General allow the relinquishing parent to discriminate against an applicant solely on the basis of the applicant’s homosexuality? (2) Does that not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) The short answer is yes. Mr Birney: It does make a mockery of the Government’s agenda. Mr McGINTY: The legislation will allow discrimination in the case of placement of an adoptee to give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. The current law provides that the director general of the Department for Community Development is responsible for the placement of adoptees. Mr Birney: Why not repeal it? It is discriminatory. Mr McGINTY: Only one criterion is applied when placing an adoptee; that is, the welfare of that child. The Government will move amendments to further enhance that criterion. The director general must give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother, unless that is not practical. There is an overriding imperative. If a child is not wanted by his or her birth mother, the department must ask the mother what she wants. If she expresses a discriminatory view about the placement of her child - for example, she might want the child placed with a Muslim family, in the city or with a gay couple - effect will be given to her wishes. The Government is further strengthening that process by amending the Equal Opportunity Act to ensure that, because the criterion is the welfare of the child, the decision cannot be called into question before the Equal Opportunity Commission on the basis of discrimination. The member’s point is that that is discriminatory. The Adoption Act provides that the adopting parent cannot be over the age of 40. That is discrimination on the basis of age. Section 52 of the Act refers to the placement of the child in culturally appropriate circumstances that will enable that child to continue his or her education and cultural development and so on. That is discrimination. The legislation contains a prohibition on certain classes of people, regardless of their parenting skills, being considered as adoptive parents. The Government proposes to remove that prohibition. The only consideration will be who are the best parents for a child, taking into account the wishes of the relinquishing parent. Broadening the range of people who are eligible to adopt will enable the director general of the Department for Community Development to make the best decision about who will provide the best family and the best parenting. That is the purpose of the legislation. Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
(2) Does that not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) The short answer is yes. Mr Birney: It does make a mockery of the Government’s agenda. Mr McGINTY: The legislation will allow discrimination in the case of placement of an adoptee to give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. The current law provides that the director general of the Department for Community Development is responsible for the placement of adoptees. Mr Birney: Why not repeal it? It is discriminatory. Mr McGINTY: Only one criterion is applied when placing an adoptee; that is, the welfare of that child. The Government will move amendments to further enhance that criterion. The director general must give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother, unless that is not practical. There is an overriding imperative. If a child is not wanted by his or her birth mother, the department must ask the mother what she wants. If she expresses a discriminatory view about the placement of her child - for example, she might want the child placed with a Muslim family, in the city or with a gay couple - effect will be given to her wishes. The Government is further strengthening that process by amending the Equal Opportunity Act to ensure that, because the criterion is the welfare of the child, the decision cannot be called into question before the Equal Opportunity Commission on the basis of discrimination. The member’s point is that that is discriminatory. The Adoption Act provides that the adopting parent cannot be over the age of 40. That is discrimination on the basis of age. Section 52 of the Act refers to the placement of the child in culturally appropriate circumstances that will enable that child to continue his or her education and cultural development and so on. That is discrimination. The legislation contains a prohibition on certain classes of people, regardless of their parenting skills, being considered as adoptive parents. The Government proposes to remove that prohibition. The only consideration will be who are the best parents for a child, taking into account the wishes of the relinquishing parent. Broadening the range of people who are eligible to adopt will enable the director general of the Department for Community Development to make the best decision about who will provide the best family and the best parenting. That is the purpose of the legislation. Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) The short answer is yes. Mr Birney: It does make a mockery of the Government’s agenda. Mr McGINTY: The legislation will allow discrimination in the case of placement of an adoptee to give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. The current law provides that the director general of the Department for Community Development is responsible for the placement of adoptees. Mr Birney: Why not repeal it? It is discriminatory. Mr McGINTY: Only one criterion is applied when placing an adoptee; that is, the welfare of that child. The Government will move amendments to further enhance that criterion. The director general must give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother, unless that is not practical. There is an overriding imperative. If a child is not wanted by his or her birth mother, the department must ask the mother what she wants. If she expresses a discriminatory view about the placement of her child - for example, she might want the child placed with a Muslim family, in the city or with a gay couple - effect will be given to her wishes. The Government is further strengthening that process by amending the Equal Opportunity Act to ensure that, because the criterion is the welfare of the child, the decision cannot be called into question before the Equal Opportunity Commission on the basis of discrimination. The member’s point is that that is discriminatory. The Adoption Act provides that the adopting parent cannot be over the age of 40. That is discrimination on the basis of age. Section 52 of the Act refers to the placement of the child in culturally appropriate circumstances that will enable that child to continue his or her education and cultural development and so on. That is discrimination. The legislation contains a prohibition on certain classes of people, regardless of their parenting skills, being considered as adoptive parents. The Government proposes to remove that prohibition. The only consideration will be who are the best parents for a child, taking into account the wishes of the relinquishing parent. Broadening the range of people who are eligible to adopt will enable the director general of the Department for Community Development to make the best decision about who will provide the best family and the best parenting. That is the purpose of the legislation. Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
(1)-(2) The short answer is yes. Mr Birney: It does make a mockery of the Government’s agenda. Mr McGINTY: The legislation will allow discrimination in the case of placement of an adoptee to give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. The current law provides that the director general of the Department for Community Development is responsible for the placement of adoptees. Mr Birney: Why not repeal it? It is discriminatory. Mr McGINTY: Only one criterion is applied when placing an adoptee; that is, the welfare of that child. The Government will move amendments to further enhance that criterion. The director general must give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother, unless that is not practical. There is an overriding imperative. If a child is not wanted by his or her birth mother, the department must ask the mother what she wants. If she expresses a discriminatory view about the placement of her child - for example, she might want the child placed with a Muslim family, in the city or with a gay couple - effect will be given to her wishes. The Government is further strengthening that process by amending the Equal Opportunity Act to ensure that, because the criterion is the welfare of the child, the decision cannot be called into question before the Equal Opportunity Commission on the basis of discrimination. The member’s point is that that is discriminatory. The Adoption Act provides that the adopting parent cannot be over the age of 40. That is discrimination on the basis of age. Section 52 of the Act refers to the placement of the child in culturally appropriate circumstances that will enable that child to continue his or her education and cultural development and so on. That is discrimination. The legislation contains a prohibition on certain classes of people, regardless of their parenting skills, being considered as adoptive parents. The Government proposes to remove that prohibition. The only consideration will be who are the best parents for a child, taking into account the wishes of the relinquishing parent. Broadening the range of people who are eligible to adopt will enable the director general of the Department for Community Development to make the best decision about who will provide the best family and the best parenting. That is the purpose of the legislation. Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr Birney: It does make a mockery of the Government’s agenda. Mr McGINTY: The legislation will allow discrimination in the case of placement of an adoptee to give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. The current law provides that the director general of the Department for Community Development is responsible for the placement of adoptees. Mr Birney: Why not repeal it? It is discriminatory. Mr McGINTY: Only one criterion is applied when placing an adoptee; that is, the welfare of that child. The Government will move amendments to further enhance that criterion. The director general must give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother, unless that is not practical. There is an overriding imperative. If a child is not wanted by his or her birth mother, the department must ask the mother what she wants. If she expresses a discriminatory view about the placement of her child - for example, she might want the child placed with a Muslim family, in the city or with a gay couple - effect will be given to her wishes. The Government is further strengthening that process by amending the Equal Opportunity Act to ensure that, because the criterion is the welfare of the child, the decision cannot be called into question before the Equal Opportunity Commission on the basis of discrimination. The member’s point is that that is discriminatory. The Adoption Act provides that the adopting parent cannot be over the age of 40. That is discrimination on the basis of age. Section 52 of the Act refers to the placement of the child in culturally appropriate circumstances that will enable that child to continue his or her education and cultural development and so on. That is discrimination. The legislation contains a prohibition on certain classes of people, regardless of their parenting skills, being considered as adoptive parents. The Government proposes to remove that prohibition. The only consideration will be who are the best parents for a child, taking into account the wishes of the relinquishing parent. Broadening the range of people who are eligible to adopt will enable the director general of the Department for Community Development to make the best decision about who will provide the best family and the best parenting. That is the purpose of the legislation. Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr McGINTY: The legislation will allow discrimination in the case of placement of an adoptee to give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. The current law provides that the director general of the Department for Community Development is responsible for the placement of adoptees. Mr Birney: Why not repeal it? It is discriminatory. Mr McGINTY: Only one criterion is applied when placing an adoptee; that is, the welfare of that child. The Government will move amendments to further enhance that criterion. The director general must give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother, unless that is not practical. There is an overriding imperative. If a child is not wanted by his or her birth mother, the department must ask the mother what she wants. If she expresses a discriminatory view about the placement of her child - for example, she might want the child placed with a Muslim family, in the city or with a gay couple - effect will be given to her wishes. The Government is further strengthening that process by amending the Equal Opportunity Act to ensure that, because the criterion is the welfare of the child, the decision cannot be called into question before the Equal Opportunity Commission on the basis of discrimination. The member’s point is that that is discriminatory. The Adoption Act provides that the adopting parent cannot be over the age of 40. That is discrimination on the basis of age. Section 52 of the Act refers to the placement of the child in culturally appropriate circumstances that will enable that child to continue his or her education and cultural development and so on. That is discrimination. The legislation contains a prohibition on certain classes of people, regardless of their parenting skills, being considered as adoptive parents. The Government proposes to remove that prohibition. The only consideration will be who are the best parents for a child, taking into account the wishes of the relinquishing parent. Broadening the range of people who are eligible to adopt will enable the director general of the Department for Community Development to make the best decision about who will provide the best family and the best parenting. That is the purpose of the legislation. Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr Birney: Why not repeal it? It is discriminatory. Mr McGINTY: Only one criterion is applied when placing an adoptee; that is, the welfare of that child. The Government will move amendments to further enhance that criterion. The director general must give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother, unless that is not practical. There is an overriding imperative. If a child is not wanted by his or her birth mother, the department must ask the mother what she wants. If she expresses a discriminatory view about the placement of her child - for example, she might want the child placed with a Muslim family, in the city or with a gay couple - effect will be given to her wishes. The Government is further strengthening that process by amending the Equal Opportunity Act to ensure that, because the criterion is the welfare of the child, the decision cannot be called into question before the Equal Opportunity Commission on the basis of discrimination. The member’s point is that that is discriminatory. The Adoption Act provides that the adopting parent cannot be over the age of 40. That is discrimination on the basis of age. Section 52 of the Act refers to the placement of the child in culturally appropriate circumstances that will enable that child to continue his or her education and cultural development and so on. That is discrimination. The legislation contains a prohibition on certain classes of people, regardless of their parenting skills, being considered as adoptive parents. The Government proposes to remove that prohibition. The only consideration will be who are the best parents for a child, taking into account the wishes of the relinquishing parent. Broadening the range of people who are eligible to adopt will enable the director general of the Department for Community Development to make the best decision about who will provide the best family and the best parenting. That is the purpose of the legislation. Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr McGINTY: Only one criterion is applied when placing an adoptee; that is, the welfare of that child. The Government will move amendments to further enhance that criterion. The director general must give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother, unless that is not practical. There is an overriding imperative. If a child is not wanted by his or her birth mother, the department must ask the mother what she wants. If she expresses a discriminatory view about the placement of her child - for example, she might want the child placed with a Muslim family, in the city or with a gay couple - effect will be given to her wishes. The Government is further strengthening that process by amending the Equal Opportunity Act to ensure that, because the criterion is the welfare of the child, the decision cannot be called into question before the Equal Opportunity Commission on the basis of discrimination. The member’s point is that that is discriminatory. The Adoption Act provides that the adopting parent cannot be over the age of 40. That is discrimination on the basis of age. Section 52 of the Act refers to the placement of the child in culturally appropriate circumstances that will enable that child to continue his or her education and cultural development and so on. That is discrimination. The legislation contains a prohibition on certain classes of people, regardless of their parenting skills, being considered as adoptive parents. The Government proposes to remove that prohibition. The only consideration will be who are the best parents for a child, taking into account the wishes of the relinquishing parent. Broadening the range of people who are eligible to adopt will enable the director general of the Department for Community Development to make the best decision about who will provide the best family and the best parenting. That is the purpose of the legislation. Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
The director general must give effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother, unless that is not practical. There is an overriding imperative. If a child is not wanted by his or her birth mother, the department must ask the mother what she wants. If she expresses a discriminatory view about the placement of her child - for example, she might want the child placed with a Muslim family, in the city or with a gay couple - effect will be given to her wishes. The Government is further strengthening that process by amending the Equal Opportunity Act to ensure that, because the criterion is the welfare of the child, the decision cannot be called into question before the Equal Opportunity Commission on the basis of discrimination. The member’s point is that that is discriminatory. The Adoption Act provides that the adopting parent cannot be over the age of 40. That is discrimination on the basis of age. Section 52 of the Act refers to the placement of the child in culturally appropriate circumstances that will enable that child to continue his or her education and cultural development and so on. That is discrimination. The legislation contains a prohibition on certain classes of people, regardless of their parenting skills, being considered as adoptive parents. The Government proposes to remove that prohibition. The only consideration will be who are the best parents for a child, taking into account the wishes of the relinquishing parent. Broadening the range of people who are eligible to adopt will enable the director general of the Department for Community Development to make the best decision about who will provide the best family and the best parenting. That is the purpose of the legislation. Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
The member’s point is that that is discriminatory. The Adoption Act provides that the adopting parent cannot be over the age of 40. That is discrimination on the basis of age. Section 52 of the Act refers to the placement of the child in culturally appropriate circumstances that will enable that child to continue his or her education and cultural development and so on. That is discrimination. The legislation contains a prohibition on certain classes of people, regardless of their parenting skills, being considered as adoptive parents. The Government proposes to remove that prohibition. The only consideration will be who are the best parents for a child, taking into account the wishes of the relinquishing parent. Broadening the range of people who are eligible to adopt will enable the director general of the Department for Community Development to make the best decision about who will provide the best family and the best parenting. That is the purpose of the legislation. Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr Birney interjected. Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr McGINTY: Yes. That applies with this legislation. Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Ms Sue Walker: Will the relinquishing mother know she has a range of people from whom to choose? Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr McGINTY: The Department for Community Development will provide a list of prospective adoptive parents. That list will be discussed with the relinquishing mother, and she will be asked to express a view. Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr Birney: You have not answered the second part of the question. Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr McGINTY: What was that? Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr Birney: Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s agenda to wipe out discrimination against gay and lesbian people in our State? Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Mr McGINTY: It is my view that discrimination will continue in certain areas in a variety of walks of life. In this case, the wishes of the relinquishing mother should be given enormous priority. If the relinquishing mother prefers that a particular class of parent be or not be the adopting parents of her child, we should respect that. That will include the ability for the mother to say that she does not want the child to go to a particular racial group or to people of a particular sexual orientation or parents with a particular social or economic background. We are giving effect to the wishes of the relinquishing mother. If that is discriminatory, so be it.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.