[LegalZone]

.

If you are in the UK please lobby your MP about, The Access to Information
(Pre-Commencement Adoptions) Regulations 2004 which have been published in draft form for further consultation.

http://www.dfes.gov.uk/consultations...ltationId=1248

If you live outside of the UK but are affected by this legislation by virtue of having been involved in an adoption that took place in England or Wales then please write directly to The Minster for Children and Families, the Rt Hon Margaret Hodge MP at the address on the Consultation document or via your local British Embassy or Consular Office or High Commission.

Do you want a social worker to be able decide whether it is appropriate for your birth relative to be able to search for you? Surely only you should have that decision to make? If a social worker feels that an applicant may have a harmful intent then surely she should refer the matter to the High Court as is the present procedure when there is such concern about an adoptee applying for access to birth records.

Do you want a civil servant to be able decide whether it is appropriate for your birth relative to be able to search for you?

Do you want to be charged hundreds of pounds for a search for your birth relative that should cost no more than few pounds? There seems to be no firm regulation on fees, or on what means of test will be made in deciding who may be excused those fees.

When Section 9, 98, and 144(2) of the Adoption and Children Act 2002 was being debated in 2002 many people and organisations expressed concern that so much was being left to "secondary legislation", that is, rules and regulations made up by Civil Servants and passed without proper full parliamentary debate. Ms Jacqui Smith the minister in charge at that time told us all that there would be full public debate on these regulations.

For the Adoption and Children Act 2002 see

http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts2002/20020038.htm

And its Explanatory Notes

http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/en2002/2002en38.htm

Responsibility has now shifted to the Department for Education and Skills and to the Minster for Children, Ms Margaret Hodge. Many of you will remember Ms Hodge, but just in case here is a little of her history.

From the Guardian.

http://society.guardian.co.uk/child...1087250,00.html

Do you want to let this woman to get away with depriving you of a democratic right.

I do think numbers are going to be important here, so I hope everyone will use the Feedback Form at

http://www.dfes.gov.uk/consultations...ltationId=1248

to make their own comments as well.

Some people have contacted me to say that they have had difficulty downloading the documents from the DoH/DfES websites so I have put the full package of documents as a Zip file at

http://homepage.mac.com/harritt/consultation.zip

I also hope that everyone will write to their own MP to ask him or her to ask Ms Hodge the Minister in charge of this consultation why it does not meet the the guidelines set out in the 'Code of Practice on written consultation'?

It is important that you do it that way as your MP is obliged by rules of parliamentary procedure to answer a constituents letter. And a Government Minister is obliged to answer any questions put to him/her by a member of parliament.

Specifically the guidelines state:

1/ Consultation widely throughout the process, allowing a minimum of 12 weeks for written consultation at least once during the development of policy

It is now about half way through this consultation, few of the general public or the majority of people who might want to respond have been made aware of this consultation.

2/ Be clear about what your proposals are, who may be affected, what questions are being asked and the timescale for responses

There are a number of instances where they have not been at all clear about
what the proposals are and who will be affected.

3/ Ensure that your consultation is clear, concise and widely accessible.

It is very poorly accessible, the website keeps moving is difficult to find and does not work properly.

None of the meetings that have been convened on this consultation are open to the public at large, nor even to the majority of those who will be affected by this legislation, very few if any of the individuals who have contributed to previous rounds of consultation seem to have been invited to consultation meetings. The DfES seems to have assumed we are all happy to let a few organisations that represent less than 1% of us speak for us all.

Here is part of the e-mail from the DfES again, please don't shoot the messenger here. We want a response from Margaret Hodge the Minister for Children and Families.

<quote>

”... I am sorry that I was unable to give you advance notification of the publication of the consultation documents. In the lead-up to publication, the date of publication changed several times in order that we could generate media interest. Margaret Hodge was also keen to publicise the consultation through TV and radio so we had to delay publication to accommodate her availability for interviews etc. The week in which we published the consultation document was particularly frenetic.

The consultation document is available on-line at

www.children.doh.gov.uk/adoption.

It is also available on the DfES' e-consultation system. This allows users to view the document on screen and to provide written comments/feedback on-line.

This site can be accessed at

www.dfes.gov.uk/consultations

Turning to the consultation process, I hope you will understand that we do not have the capacity to convene consultation events for the public and service-users as well as practitioners. As you know, this consultation exercise is part of a much wider work programme to implement the 2002 Act and we have therefore had to limit the number of consultation events so that all the consultation packages could be accommodated. We have invited a range of stakeholder representatives, including those representing birth relatives, adoptive parents and adopted persons and we believe that these organisations will effectively communicate the views of those people whom they represent. Finally, I should point out that the consultation workshops are primarily technical, designed to help refine the secondary legislation and supporting guidance in collaboration with those practitioners who will be using the documents on a daily basis. Of course we value the view of service users too but I think it is right that practitioners are given priority for the consultation events. Of course, as the consultation document makes clear, we welcome the written comments of any person with an interest in adoption and guarantee that all written responses will be carefully considered before the regulations and guidance are finalised. We are also looking at developing more detailed good practice guidance before the regulations come into force in September 2005 and this may present further opportunities for service users to contribute....“

<end quote>

As you can see from the e-mail quoted above the government is not at all interested in hearing the views of those affected by this legislation, only those of the social worker and organisations that will administer it.

I hope everyone will understand how important this is and do their bit by answering the Consultation by using the Feedback Form and by writing to their MP in the terms outlined above.

Address your letter to.

Your MP
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA

Do it before it's too late

Or If you live outside of the UK but are affected by this legislation by virtue of having been involved in an adoption that took place in England or Wales then please write directly to The Minster for Children and Families Rt Hon Margaret Hodge MP at the address on the Consultation document or via your local British Embassy or Consular Office or High Commission.

Robin Harritt

http://harritt.net
.
.

[LegalZone]

Hi All

I hope you are all busy out there doing something about BOTH of the current government consultations on draft regulations.

Fortunately I have managed to find all my siblings on my mother's side despite the social workers involved trying their best to prevent me in the early 1990s. Five of them had been adopted to different families. The only times that things nearly went very seriously wrong it was because of almost moronic actions by social workers who had no idea on earth of how to act in such a situation.

I have siblings on my father's side. should they wish to find me they would have no way except through the adoption agency, of proving a relationship. My birth father's name is not on my OBC.

It really frightens me to think the same bunch of idiots at Barnardos who took twelve years of fighting with to give me my own medical records, can decide whether a brother or sister's search for me is appropriate.

I am particularly disappointed with theses regulation as I was instrumental in getting the primary legislation that makes them possible passed. I wanted the power to decide on who could search for who, taken away from adoption agencies, not to add to their powers in that respect. The only way a social worker should be able to discontinue a search if she has gone to court to obtain an injunction.

I'm sure many birthmothers who feel that they were forced to relinquish a child against their will, will be appalled that a social worker, perhaps in some cases even the very same, then very junior but now very senior. social worker will be deciding if their search is "appropriate" or not.

Giving the history of agencies such as Barnardos, giving them that power is simply wrong. Barnardo's has shown over and over again that it far more concerned with its own backside covering exercise, than it is with telling its past charges the truth. I'm sure many of the other long established agencies from the closed era would also be far more concerned about the legal repercussions of unnecessarily splitting up a sibling group than they would about reuniting that group. These regulations were written for the convenience of the agencies, and the Does wants to make pretty **** sure you and I as individuals don't have our say.

Sorry to ramble on so, and in a somewhat personal way but I don't think in the adoption community realise how important it is to do something about this draft legislation now before it becomes real legislation.

Please if you haven't looked at the threads on the legislation do so now, think about what you are going to do.

Robin Harritt

http://robin.robin.org/postadoption

http://harritt.net

[Robin Harritt]

.
It's too late now to return the Feedback form but you can all still write to your MPs about how poor the consultation process has been you can also still make a formal complaint to the DfES.

You can read a pdf of my letter to David Holmes, Divisional Manager,
DfES, Looked After Children Division at http://complaintletter.harritt.net

And Ms Hodge has answered my MP's letter, She believes that the recent consultation was adequate. Please do write to her tell her whether or not you think the recent consultations complied with the Code of Practice on Consultation at the back of the Feedback forms. If you've never seen a Feedback form and didn't even know that there has been a consultation then it definately didn't meet those requirements.

She says:


".... Mr Harritt also makes the point that the consultation exercise on the draft regulations and guidance did not meet the guidance in the Code of Practice on Consultation. I am unable to accept this point. First, the Code of Practice requires that we consult widely through out [sic] the process, allowing a minimum twelve weeks for written consultation. The consultation period on the access to information proposals totaled four months and the document was made widely available through the adoption website, the DfES e-consultation site and in hard copy format. Second, the consultation document also received significant media coverage through the national press, television and radio as well as in the relevant professional journals. I do however admit that some stakeholders experienced delays in obtaining hard copies of the consultation document and officials have pursued these complaints with the department's distribution company, Prolog. Where there was a significant delay in obtaining a hard copy of the document, we allowed stakeholders to submit their consultation responses beyond the deadline date of 31 July.

As I am sure Mr Harritt will appreciate, the access to information provisions represent one of the most complex and emotive areas of the Adoption and Children Act. That is why we need the input of stakeholders to help shape the final document and ensure it is clear, concise and workable. I am satisfied that any person with an interest in adoption was given ample opportunity to submit their views. We received a large number of responses from a wide range of people involved in adoption - including adoption professionals, adopted people, adoptive parents and birth relatives. We are now looking carefully at the comments and suggestions that have been submitted as work is taken forward to finalise the regulations and guidance by the end of this year. We will be providing feedback on those responses as required by the Code of Practice...."


If anyone disagrees with Ms Hodge that this has been an adequate consultation or that it has complied with the Code of Practice which was outlined at the end of the Feedback form for the consultation, (and the same applies to the consultation on Adoption Support Survives and Adoption Support Agencies Regulations) please make your views known to Ms Margaret Hodge MP at dfes.ministers@dfes.gsi.gov.uk and if you feel inclined to make a formal complaint about just how poor the consultations have been then you can make a formal complaint in the first instance to:

David Holmes, Divisional Manager,
DfES, Looked After Children Division
Room 101 Wellington House,
133-155 Waterloo Road,
London SE1 8UG.

Perhaps then she will take another look at their definition of "stakeholders in adoption" various social work organisations may well have been given a say, few of us who are genuinely affected by this legislation have been.

Posted by Robin Harritt

http://harritt.net
. [/b][/quote]