Legislative Issues

Adoption both separates families and creates new ones. While separation may be beneficial, the complete severance from one's family and/or cultural heritage, and background medical information sets up troubling inequities for adoptees, and leaves adoptive and birth parents with many questions.

After the landmark Ontario adoption legislation in 1927 which ordered that adoption records be sealed, most provinces followed suit. Québec was no exception. In very recent times, however, popular demand for adoption law reform has resulted in initiatives like the adoption disclosure registries in Ontario and B.C. Currently most provinces are either studying the subject or are looking at enacting reforms of some kind, but Québec has stalled on the issue. After the 1998 presentation of an extensive Projet de loi legislation proposal (researched and prepared by André Desaulniers and Jean-Pierre Arcoragi over many years), timed to be presented during a semi-open province-wide consultation process that resulted in the Simard Report, Québec has remained silent.

Rights

What rights does, and should a person have to information about their biological identity? Is a birth mother's anonymity more important than an adoptee's right to know who they are, and have a medical history? What about a birth father's rights, or those of birth siblings? What if a birth mother was underaged, or uninformed of her rights, and in retrospect, realizes she was forced to give up her child? How much right to information, and of what kind, do all parties have? These are just a few of many important legal (and ethical) questions around this cultural phenomenon called adoption, where one person's legal identity is changed for another, without their consent, while they are still a child.

See also our Legislative links.

Adoption Legislation Reform Worldwide: basic concepts

Adoption legislation review and amendment has been occcurring in many countries, provinces and states across the world in recent years, and their effects are being closely monitored. Policies and approaches vary, but these are some of the main concepts:

• "sealed" adoptions: all documents with child's true identifying origins are sealed (sometimes destroyed or altered), and subsequent documents (including birth certificate) are issued with the child's new legal identity "as if born to" its adopting family. The sealed records remain with the agency that handled the adoption, if it was an agency adoption, and at the hospital of birth, if it took place in a hospital. The prior identity is effectively unavailable to the adopted person, or their adoptive parents (officially anyway), and the birth parent has no access to the child's new legal adopted name -- the files are sealed at both ends.
• "open" or "semi-open" adoptions: selected contacts between adoptees and birth parents (usually letters, photos, and/or occasional visits), negotiated by the birth parent(s) and the adoptive family, via a social agency, or privately. Mainly available at the grassroots level, at private agencies. Recent social development in the past decade.
• passive registries: one party requests contact and waits for the other to also submit a request.
• active registries: the registry employees (usually social workers) make contact with the other party on behalf of the requester (i.e. Disclosure Registries in B.C. and Ontario).
• "open" records: disclosure of adoptee's original and birth parent names upon request, not before the age of the adoptee's majority. May or may not include veto option by either party (NOTE: the right to veto disclosure is being challenged in the B.C. legal system as a violation of the right to identity).
  

The concept of Open Records is supported by the National Action Committee on the Status of Women.

Legislative Reform in Canada -- a roundup*
(* for comprehensive and up-to-the-minute information, click here)

• 1 - British Columbia: Disclosure Registry in operation, with Contact or Disclosure Veto options. The veto is being challenged under the B.C. Human Rights Code as discrimination in public service based on family status.
• 2 - Alberta: Adoption Act currently under government review. Time table for legislative action unknown.
• 3 - Manitoba: passed an Adoption Act in summer of 1997 with many restrictions, but regulations not yet complete, and records still sealed. Post-adoption groups are hoping the legislature will re-introduce an Adoption Act sometime in 2002.
• 4 - Ontario: Has current Disclosure Registry in operation. Adoptees born before 1970 get given name and surname. Those born after 1970 get only given name, and surname initital. Legislation to permit access to records was tabled on June 10, 1998. Bill was not passed.
• 5 - Québec: Adoption Act no longer under government review despite the Rochon and Simard reports that recommend open records with no-contact vetoes, and an extensive Projet de loi proposal from André Desaulniers and Jean-Marc Arcoragi. A $450 pay-per-search fee is still in effect (highest in the country).
• 6 - Newfoundland and Labrador: May 18, 2002: The new Adoption Act for Newfoundland is now expected to be passed into law on July 1st, 2002 after an almost two year delay. No charge or search fee.
• 7 - Northwest Territories: Open Records, with an Adoption Disclosure registry, as of November 1st, 1998. No contact blocks nor disclosure vetoes, and no charge to register.
• 8 - Nova Scotia: has a Disclosure Registry in operation, and dropped its $250 pay-per-search fee.
• 9 - New Brunswick: has a Disclosure Registry; no fees.
• 10 - Nunavut: no fees.
  

Situation in Québec -- what's happening NOW

Update November 2002: André Desaulniers completes his summary of grievance regarding adoptees' lack of rights as administered by the PQ government. Dynamite! Currently available in French, downloadable in PDF format (Acrobat Reader version 4.0)

Highlights of the struggle for Open Records in Québec:

• Starting in 1984, André Desaulniers fights a long, lonely battle for open records and the right to know that one is adopted or not. He and Jean-Pierre Arcoragi research and write a Projet de loi, a complete legislative proposal supported by Parent Finders and the Mouvement Rétrouvailles.
• In spring of 1998 a government committee was finally struck to study the situation, as well as André's proposed changes to the law. The Committee was to be comprised of individuals from social agencies, adoptee/birthmother rights groups (Le Mouvement Rétrouvailles), etc. Parent Finders is not invited to be part of this process.
• In March '98, PF NCR (Ottawa-Hull) President Patricia McCarron spoke to M. Vital Simard, a planning officer for Mr. Jean Rochon, the (then) Minister of Health and Social Services. According to him:
  • The committee would review current adoption legislation in Canada and elsewhere.
  • Would have public consultations around the province to ensure they hear from members of the adoption community.
  • They would address the rights of all parties in an adoption, and not just adoptees.
  • They would also review accessibility to search and reunion services.
    
• June 1998: Elspeth Ross from the Adoption Council of Canada, and Patricia McCarron (a primary mover and shaker in the Ontario adoption reform movement) were participants. Patricia McCarron spoke on behalf of PF Canada, PFMTL and PF NCR. They reported that the committee was composed of 'paid' members (social workers, administrators, and 'paid' representation from Le Mouvement Rétrouvailles), and that 'unpaid' adoption community workers and volunteers were under-represented. Therefore, M. Simard heard mainly from social workers, who see little need for reform, but want more funding. Although the rumour had been that the 14 regions of the province were for open records, M. Simard expressed concern regarding the notion of confidentiality. You can view the letter (in French) sent to Québec by Patricia McCarron on June 6th, 1998.
  
• In March 2000 the Simard Report recommended opening sealed records, with options for no-contact vetoes. If this became law, it would include a government advertising campaign to alert adoptees and birthparents about a 6-12 month period where they may register no-contact votes if desired.
• May 2002: after 18 years of struggle and activism on our behalf, André Desaulniers abandons his website, discouraged by a lack of popular and government support.

• September 2002: the PQ continues to ignore the issue, allowing the forces of attrition to kill off aging birth parents and adoptees, despite the fact that two reports have recommended open records. André Desaulniers re-launches his web site as an archive, and proposes to fight this challenge under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. He will need our support; please watch this space!

      PFMTL skeptic's opinion:
      Can a government that denies responsibility for the Duplessis Orphans tragedy
      be enthusiastic about opening adoption records across the province? Can a
      government that prefers to protect abusers in the Catholic Church and the medical
      profession rather than their victims truly be interested in exposing more church and
      medical corruption? Their silence is an answer that says, "attrition will solve the
	   problem eventually, if these people will just stay silent."

      We think the people of Québec want these changes, but that public outcry is necessary 
      before the PQ will act. Get informed, and write a letter (see below) to express your 
      opinion about matters that affect you, or your loved ones.

      Or, see your Opposition MNA.

Letters still have the most impact on governments.
Want reform? Tell Québec!

Write or fax the Minister of Health and Social Services in Québec City:

Ministre de la santé et services sociaux
Édifice Catherine-de-Longpré
1075, Chemin Ste- Foy
Québec, QC
GlS 2M1
fax: (418)-644-4534
tel: (418)-643-3180

Should you wish more information on composing a letter (in either English or French), please contact Parent Finders Montréal or Parent Finders NCR (Ottawa-Hull).

Thank you et un gros merci from PFMTL to Patricia McCarron for her efforts at lobbying for change on our behalf, and of course to André Desaulniers for all his wonderful work.