Adoption Information Disclosure Act

Last updated

The Adoption Information Disclosure Act, formally An Act respecting the disclosure of information and records to adopted persons and birth parents, also known as Bill 183, is an Ontario (Canada) law regarding the disclosure of information between parties involved in adoptions.

Contents

The Act was passed by the Legislative Assembly of Ontario in 2005 and put into force on September 17, 2007. [1] Significant sections of it were quashed just two days later in a ruling by Judge Edward Belobaba of the Ontario Superior Court. [2]

On November 13, 2007, the Ontario government announced that instead of appealing Belobaba's decision, it would opt to amend the act to contain a universal disclosure veto. [3] It accordingly introduced the Access to Adoption Records Act on December 10, 2007, which passed third reading in May 2008 and took effect in September 2008.

Background

From 1927 until the mid-1980s, certain measures existed in Ontario to preserve anonymity between birth parents and adoptees; this was consistent with adoption practice elsewhere in Canada and the United States at that time.

The practice was reduced but not eliminated for current adoptions, but there remained the question of what to do with existing adoption records: how does the right to information for either party compare with the obligation of honouring past commitments to privacy?

Adoptees and birth parents could apply to be put onto the government-run Adoption Disclosure Register, but the process was long, the resources for active searches for birth relatives were limited, and success was not guaranteed.

NDP MPP Marilyn Churley introduced several bills into the Legislative Assembly starting in the late 1990s. Her strong stance for open records was personally motivated, as she had placed a child for adoption years earlier and was later reunited with him. None of these bills were passed.

Bill 183

In 2005, Sandra Pupatello introduced Bill 183, the Adoption Information Disclosure Act. It permits the disclosure, to an adult adoptee, of that adoptee's original full name, birth certificate, and the names of birth parents. To birth parents, it permits the disclosure of an adoptee's legal (adoptive) name.

The bill was supported by the Ontario Association of Children's Aid Societies. It was criticized by others, many of whom were opposed to its lack of a general disclosure veto (see below). Ontario Privacy Commissioner Ann Cavoukian stated that the bill was insufficiently respectful of implicit or explicit promises of anonymity made to birth mothers in the past. Several adoptees including Denbigh Patton and birth parents campaigned actively against the bill, Patton arguing that he alone should decide when, if ever, to release his identity to his birth parents.

Bill 183 was passed 68 to 19 by the Legislative Assembly of Ontario on November 1, 2005. All 19 votes against the bill came from the opposition Conservatives, who objected to the lack of a disclosure veto provision. [4]

Disclosure veto question

Unlike several other retroactive adoption disclosure laws in Canada and unlike any of Churley's proposals, Bill 183 did not have any universal "disclosure veto" provision. Such a provision typically allows a party to issue, within a fixed time period after the law's introduction, a request that his or her identifying information not be released.

The bill did provide a "contact veto", similar to a restraining order whereby a concerned party can request not to be contacted by his or her birth relative, but this does not prevent the release of the person's name.

As well, Bill 183 did have a restricted disclosure veto. Adoptees or birth parents could apply to a tribunal to prohibit the release of their identifying information in cases where they can demonstrate their safety is at stake. [5] [6]

Court challenge

A group of adoptees and "birth parents", opposed to the new law, promised upon the bill's passage to mount a constitutional challenge to it, and retained noted Toronto lawyer Clayton Ruby for this purpose. [7]

COAR (Coalition for Open Adoption Records) obtained amicus curiae status to put forward their side in this court case, supporting the position of the Ontario government. [8] The presiding judge, Justice Edward Belobaba, stated that "I'm not ready to buy those three words: right to privacy," and noted earlier that the lawyers mounting the constitutional challenge on behalf of three adoptees and a birth father "have the tougher job." [5]

Belobaba ultimately sided with the challengers, writing that the act breached the privacy provisions granted by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. [2] He noted that while the Charter protected the privacy rights of the challengers he did not see similar rights for those searching for information saying "...this is not a case where we have competing Charter-protected rights. The applicants' right to liberty under s. 7 has been breached. The rights of the searching adoptees or birth parents to the disclosure of confidential adoption information, although important and heartfelt, are not protected by s. 7 or any other provision of the Charter."

Advocates of open records continue to express concern that in the wake of increased security measures, many documents relating to immigration, passports and travel require presentation of a long form birth certificate, which they say is not available to Ontario adoptees. They claim that for adult adoptees who are unsuccessful in obtaining long form birth certificates, travel, employment and immigration can be in some circumstances effectively prohibited.

Those on the other side of the debate continue to express relief at the inclusion of a non-disclosure veto in the proposed new law, saying it would strike a reasonable balance between the right of adoptees to know their parentage, the desire of "birth parents" to learn the fate of their progeny and the right of adult adoptees and others to control the uses of private information held in government records.

On November 14, 2007, the Ontario government declared it would introduce a bill to amend the Act to include a universal disclosure veto. [3]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act</span> Act of the United States Congress

The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 is a United States federal law that governs the access to educational information and records by public entities such as potential employers, publicly funded educational institutions, and foreign governments. The act is also referred to as the Buckley Amendment, for one of its proponents, Senator James L. Buckley of New York.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Adoption</span> Parenting a child in place of the original parents

Adoption is a process whereby a person assumes the parenting of another, usually a child, from that person's biological or legal parent or parents. Legal adoptions permanently transfer all rights and responsibilities, along with filiation, from the biological parents to the adoptive parents.

Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is part of the Constitution of Canada. It is commonly known as the notwithstanding clause, sometimes referred to as the override power, and it allows Parliament or provincial legislatures to temporarily override sections 2 and 7–15 of the Charter.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Marilyn Churley</span> Canadian politician

Marilyn Churley is a former politician in Ontario, Canada. She was a New Democratic member of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario from 1990 to 2005 who represented the downtown Toronto ridings of Riverdale and Toronto—Danforth. She served as a cabinet minister in the Bob Rae government. In opposition she served as her party's critic for the Environment, Women's Issues and Democratic Renewal. She resigned from the legislature to run for the federal New Democratic Party. Churley was her party's candidate for the riding of Beaches—East York in 2006 and 2008, but was defeated both times.

An adoption reunion registry is a formal mechanism where adoptees and their birth family members can be reunited. Registries may be free or charge fees, be facilitated by non-profit organizations, government agencies or private businesses.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2004 California Proposition 59</span> Amendment of the Constitution of California

Proposition 59 was an amendment of the Constitution of California that introduced freedom of information or "sunshine" provisions. It was proposed by the California Legislature and overwhelmingly approved by the voters in an initiative held as part of the November 2004 elections.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sandra Pupatello</span> Canadian politician

Sandra Pupatello is a politician in Ontario, Canada. She served in the Legislative Assembly of Ontario from 1995 to 2011 as a member of the Ontario Liberal Party, serving as a cabinet minister in the government of Dalton McGuinty. She did not run in the 2011 provincial election and took a position as director of business and global markets at PricewaterhouseCoopers. On November 8, 2012, Pupatello announced her candidacy for the leadership of the Liberal Party of Ontario. On January 26, 2013, she lost to Kathleen Wynne on the third and final ballot. Afterwards, she returned to PricewaterhouseCoopers. Pupatello served as chair of Hydro One from 2014 to 2015.

Closed adoption is a process by which an infant is adopted by another family, and the record of the biological parent(s) is kept sealed. Often, the biological father is not recorded—even on the original birth certificate. An adoption of an older child who already knows their biological parent(s) cannot be made closed or secret. This used to be the most traditional and popular type of adoption, peaking in the decades of the post-World War II Baby Scoop Era. It still exists today, but it exists alongside the practice of open adoption. The sealed records effectively prevent the adoptee and the biological parents from finding, or even knowing anything about each other. However, the emergence of non-profit organizations and private companies to assist individuals with their sealed records has been effective in helping people who want to connect with biological relatives to do so.

Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a constitutional provision that protects an individual's autonomy and personal legal rights from actions of the government in Canada. There are three types of protection within the section: the right to life, liberty and security of the person. Denials of these rights are constitutional only if the denials do not breach what is referred to as fundamental justice.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ann Cavoukian</span> Canadian data privacy researcher and former Ontario civil servant (born 1952)

Ann Cavoukian is the former Information and Privacy Commissioner for the Canadian province of Ontario. Her concept of privacy by design, which takes privacy into account throughout the system engineering process, was expanded on, as part of a joint Canadian-Dutch team, both before and during her tenure as commissioner of Ontario.

In the United States, adoption is the process of creating a legal parent–child relationship between a child and a parent who was not automatically recognized as the child's parent at birth.

The Canadian Council of Natural Mothers (CCNM) is a Canadian lobby group for the rights of women who have placed children for adoption, founded in 1999. It is opposed to most continuing adoption practices, arguing that adoption is traumatic for mothers and frequently does not benefit their children as currently practised. To support mothers, CCNM maintains an active email group which discusses issues which pertain to those who have experienced adoption loss and those who may be in reunion with lost family members. Members of the CCNM also at attend adoption related conferences, government meetings and meetings with social services agencies to educate people about the experiences of natural mothers and argue for improved policies, practices and rights of mothers and adopted people.

The Adoption Disclosure Register (ADR) is an adoption reunion registry operated by the government of Ontario, Canada. It implements the adoption disclosure provisions of the Child and Family Services Act.

Ballot Measure 58 was a citizen's initiative that was passed by the voters of the U.S. state of Oregon in the November 1998 General Election. The measure restored the right of adopted adults who were born in Oregon to access their original birth certificates. The measure passed with 609,268 votes in favor, 454,122 against. It was immediately challenged by several birth mothers who had put children up for adoption, which delayed instituting the measure for a year and a half.

Adoption disclosure refers to the official release of information relating to the legal adoption of a child. Throughout much of the 20th century, many Western countries had legislation intended to prevent adoptees and adoptive families from knowing the identities of birth parents and vice versa. After a decline in the social stigma surrounding adoption, many Western countries changed laws to allow for the release of formerly secret birth information, usually with limitations.

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:

  1. is consistent with relevant federal constitutional and statutory law
  2. delineates the legal requirements and consequences of different kinds of adoption
  3. promotes the integrity and finality of adoptions while discouraging "trafficking" in minors
  4. respects the choices made by the parties to an adoption about how much confidentiality or openness they prefer in their relations with each other, subject, however, to judicial protection of the adoptee's welfare
  5. promotes the interest of minor children in being raised by individuals who are committed to, and capable of, caring for them."

The Access to Adoption Records Act is an Ontario (Canada) law passed in 2008 regarding the disclosure of information between parties involved in adoptions. It is the successor to the 2005 Adoption Information Disclosure Act, parts of which were struck down in 2007 in a ruling by Judge Edward Belobaba of the Ontario Superior Court. The bill passed third reading on May 14, 2008.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Canadian privacy law</span> Privacy law in Canada

Canadian privacy law is derived from the common law, statutes of the Parliament of Canada and the various provincial legislatures, and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Perhaps ironically, Canada's legal conceptualization of privacy, along with most modern legal Western conceptions of privacy, can be traced back to Warren and Brandeis’s "The Right to Privacy" published in the Harvard Law Review in 1890, Holvast states "Almost all authors on privacy start the discussion with the famous article 'The Right to Privacy' of Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis".

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to adoption:

In a confidential birth, the mother provides her identity to authorities, but requires that her identity not be disclosed by the authorities. In many countries, confidential births have been legalized for centuries in order to prevent formerly frequent killings of newborn children, particularly outside of marriage.

References

  1. ↑ "Ontario Fulfills Its Commitment to Deliver New Adoption Information Laws". Ontario Government. 2007-09-04. Archived from the original on August 29, 2009. Retrieved 2007-09-04.
  2. 1 2 "Adoption law struck down by Ont. court". CBC News. 2007-09-19. Retrieved 2007-09-20.
  3. 1 2 Campbell, Murray (2007-11-14). "Ontario crafts new adoption bill to uphold privacy standards". The Globe and Mail. Retrieved 2007-11-14.
  4. ↑ "Ontario's adoption records bill passes in vote". CTV News. 2005-11-02. Retrieved 2007-07-11.[ dead link ]
  5. 1 2 Cohen, Tobi (2007-06-24). "New Adoption Act challenged". Canoe.ca. Archived from the original on June 23, 2007. Retrieved 2007-07-11.{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: unfit URL (link)
  6. ↑ "An Act respecting the disclosure of information and records to adopted persons and birth parents". Ontario Statutes and Regulations. Archived from the original on 2007-05-09. Retrieved 2007-07-11.
  7. ↑ "Lawyer fights for right to privacy in Ontario adoption law". CBC News. 2006-10-13. Retrieved 2007-05-07.
  8. ↑ "Ontario group fights law allowing release of adoption records". CBC News. 2007-06-25. Retrieved 2007-07-11.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.