Act of Parliament | |
Long title | An Act to consolidate the enactments relating to the adoption of children. |
---|---|
Citation | 7 & 8 Eliz. 2. c. 5 |
Dates | |
Royal assent | 18 December 1958 |
Commencement | 1 April 1959 |
Other legislation | |
Repeals/revokes | Adoption Act 1950 |
Repealed by | |
Status: Repealed | |
Text of statute as originally enacted |
The Adoption Act 1958 (7 & 8 Eliz. 2. c. 5) was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that updated and consolidated the law relating to adoption. After receiving royal assent on 18 December 1958 it came into force on 1 April 1959, regulating requirements for adopters, requirements for adoption agencies and the procedure to be used when making or appealing a court decision on adoption. After the regulations on adoption procedure were sharply criticised, law in this area was reformed with the Adoption Act 1976, which repealed the 1958 Act.
The Act was created as a result of the report of the Hurst Committee, delivered in September 1954. The Act was given royal assent on 18 December 1958, [1] and came into effect on 1 April 1959. New regulations for adoption were created based on the Act, and came into force on 17 April. It repealed or consolidated many statutes relating to adoption, including the Adoption Act 1950 and the Children Act 1958. [2] It made several changes to the law governing consent of the natural parents, qualifications of adopters, adoption procedure and the procedure used in cases where the adoption is disputed. [3]
Section 4 of the Act governs consent, and says that people no longer have to give their consent if they were liable to contribute to the child's maintenance via a court order or agreement - for example, the father of an illegitimate child who pays child support. The consent of a local authority or school which has taken a child in is also not required, although under the regulations set up by the Act they are to be consulted and given notice of the adoption procedure. If a person whose consent is normally required (such as a natural parent) consistently and repeatedly fails to discharge their duties as a parent or guardian, they also do not have to give their consent. [4]
The Hurst Committee recommended that the emphasis for adoption should be on married couples, but this was not set down in the Act. It was agreed that, except in certain special circumstances, single men should not be allowed to adopt children on their own. [5] Joint adopters must be either 25 or at least 21 and the spouse of a 25-year-old, with this reduced to 21 in all circumstances if the adopter is a relative of the child. Medical reports must also be completed on the adopters if the child is below school leaving age, and similar (although far more detailed) reports must also be prepared for the child. [6]
The Act governed all procedure used in disputed adoption cases, and was designed to safeguard the interests of the child, natural parents and adopters. Application for a case may be made to the County Court, the High Court of Justice or the juvenile courts; in practice, the juvenile courts handled the most cases. [2] The Act also created a "provisional adoption order", issuable by the High Court or the County Court, which allows an applicant not domiciled in Britain to legally remove a British child for the purpose of adopting that child under the law of the country in which the applicants live. The Provisional Adoption Order required that the child was in the applicant's care in Britain for at least six months. Despite the name this was only a custody order, designed to act as a place holder until the applicant's nation authorised the adoption of the child. The order lasted either until the child was legally adopted or turned eighteen years old. The name caused problems as many who applied for a Provisional Adoption Order believed that they had been granted a full adoption order, despite legal advice otherwise. The result was that in the Adoption Act 1976 the name was changed to reflect its true nature.
In regards to adoption agencies, the Act allows such agencies to place children not under their control with adopters, such as those looked after by local authorities. This required submitting local authorities to the same regulation as adoption agencies, and the Act also allows them to "make and participate in arrangements for the adoption of children". [7] Provisions that regulated the adoption procedure were sharply criticised, and the Houghton Committee reported in 1972 that significant reform was needed. [8] This became the Adoption Act 1976, which along with the Adoption (Scotland) Act 1978 repealed the 1958 act in its entirety. [9] [10]
Name change is the legal act by a person of adopting a new name different from their current name.
DNA paternity testing is the use of DNA profiles to determine whether an individual is the biological parent of another individual. Paternity testing can be especially important when the rights and duties of the father are in issue and a child's paternity is in doubt. Tests can also determine the likelihood of someone being a biological grandparent. Though genetic testing is the most reliable standard, older methods also exist, including ABO blood group typing, analysis of various other proteins and enzymes, or using human leukocyte antigen antigens. The current techniques for paternity testing are using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP). Paternity testing can now also be performed while the woman is still pregnant from a blood draw.
Family courts were originally created to be a Court of Equity convened to decide matters and make orders in relation to family law, including custody of children, and could disregard certain legal requirements as long as the petitioner/plaintiff came into court with "clean hands" and the request was reasonable, "quantum meruit". Changes in laws and rules have made this distinction superfluous.
International adoption is a type of adoption in which an individual or couple residing in one country becomes the legal and permanent parent(s) of a child who is a national of another country. In general, prospective adoptive parents must meet the legal adoption requirements of their country of residence and those of the country whose nationality the child holds.
Emancipation of minors is a legal mechanism by which a minor before attaining the age of majority is freed from control by their parents or guardians, and the parents or guardians are freed from responsibility for their child. Minors are normally considered legally incompetent to enter into contracts and to handle their own affairs. Emancipation overrides that presumption and allows emancipated children to legally make certain decisions on their own behalf.
Many jurisdictions have laws applying to minors and abortion. These parental involvement laws require that one or more parents consent or be informed before their minor daughter may legally have an abortion.
In family law, contact, visitation and access are synonym terms that denotes the time that a child spends with the noncustodial parent, according to an agreed or court specified parenting schedule. The visitation term is not used in a shared parenting arrangement where both parents have joint physical custody.
The Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 is a United States federal law that governs jurisdiction over the removal of American Indian children from their families in custody, foster care and adoption cases.
Secretary of the Department of Health and Community Services v JWB and SMB, commonly known as Marion's Case, is a leading decision of the High Court of Australia, concerning whether a child has the capacity to make decisions for themselves, and when this is not possible, who may make decisions for them regarding major medical procedures. It largely adopts the views in Gillick v West Norfolk Area Health Authority, a decision of the House of Lords in England and Wales.
The Uniform Adoption Act (1994) is a model law proposed by the U.S. Uniform Law Commission. It attempts to "be a comprehensive and uniform state adoption code that:
The Family law of Singapore deals with several family legal issues in Singapore. It deals with adoptions, divorce, children's issues, division of matrimonial property, personal protection orders, probate and maintenance. The family court in Singapore oversees these legal issues. Singapore has two separate and different sets of family law: one for Muslims and the other for everyone else. Family law for Muslims is codified in the Administration of Muslim Law Act (AMLA). Family law for non-Muslims is codified in the Women's Charter. The Family Justice Courts of Singapore (FJC) handles all family cases.
The Legitimacy Act 1959 was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It was repealed by the Family Law Reform Act 1987.
Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians v. Holyfield, 490 U.S. 30 (1989), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Indian Child Welfare Act governed adoptions of Indian children. It ruled that a tribal court had jurisdiction over a state court, regardless of the location of birth of the child, if the child or the natural parents resided on the reservation.
The Adoption of Children Act 1949 was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. This legislation liberalised various rules concerning adoption. Placement of children for adoption came under the supervision of local authorities, while adopted children were given inheritance rights. In addition, the legislation also rejected the notion, implied in the Adoption of Children Act 1926, that the mother had to know the identity of the adopter if she could reasonably give consent to adoption. The Act instead allowed the identity of the adopter to be concealed behind a serial number. The act was repealed on 5 November 1993.
The legal aspects of surrogacy in any particular jurisdiction tend to hinge on a few central questions:
Law in Australia with regard to children is often based on what is considered to be in the best interest of the child. The traditional and often used assumption is that children need both a mother and a father, which plays an important role in divorce and custodial proceedings, and has carried over into adoption and fertility procedures. As of April 2018 all Australian states and territories allow adoption by same-sex couples.
Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl, 570 U.S. 637 (2013), was a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States which held that several sections of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) do not apply to Native American biological fathers who are not custodians of a Native American child. The court held that the procedures required by the ICWA to end parental rights do not apply when the child has never lived with the father. Additionally, the requirement to make extra efforts to preserve the Native American family also does not apply, nor is the preferred placement of the child in another Native American family required when no other party has formally sought to adopt the child.
Adoption in the Philippines is a process of granting social, emotional and legal family and kinship membership to an individual from the Philippines, usually a child. It involves a transfer of parental rights and obligations and provides family membership. The Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) defines adoption as a "socio-legal process of giving a permanent family to a child whose parents have voluntarily or involuntarily given up their parental rights."
Surrogacy is legal in New Zealand if it is performed altruistically, where the surrogate donates her services selflessly, without any compensation beyond the coverage of expenses. Commercial surrogacy, where the surrogate is paid in addition to the coverage of expenses, is not legal. There is a lack of specific legislation and regulations dealing with surrogacy, though the recent increase in surrogacy cases has led to a number of amendments. New Zealand is party to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, and ratified it in April 1993. The primary principle of this convention is that the best interests of the child are paramount, which must then encompass all surrogacy agreements and regulations. The lack of clear surrogacy legislation in New Zealand has led to many couples engaging in reproductive tourism in order to ensure the surrogacy is successful. This has the potential to significantly impact the human rights of all of the parties involved.
Same-sex adult adoption involves adult adoption—the adoption of one adult by another—of a partner in order to benefit in some way, such as to create family relationships, to ensure inheritance rights and to keep collateral relatives from contesting the estate plan of the adopted adult. It was most prevalent from the 1970s and 1980s to early 2000s, as during that time, many countries had not legalised same-sex marriage. It was mostly used due to same-sex marriage not being available in some countries, to create a family unit, get property and inheritance rights, securing insurance benefits and allowing recovery in tort. Same-sex adult adoption has evolved during the years, becoming less prevalent in countries where same-sex marriage is legal. It is not to be confused with LGBT adoption, wherein another party is adopted by a couple.