ADOPTION.
THE debate in the Upper Rouse on Lord Meath's Adop- tion of Children Bill, and the judgment in the case of " The Queen v. Dr. Barnardo," both show clearly the very unsatisfactory condition of our law in regard to adoption. In England there is no such thing as true adoption. The parents of a child may, it is true, temporarily divest them- selves-of their rights, and may place another person in loco parentis. Since, however, the authority under which such a transfer takes place can at any moment be revoked, the process does not in any real sense put the new father or mother in the position of the old, and none of the advan- tages which flow from a true system of adoption can be obtained. If a childless man or woman wishes to take so important a step as the adoption of a child, the first thought that occurs to him or her is,—` Can I be sure,. after I have become responsible for the maintenance of the child, that it will be entirely in my hands, and as much my own as if I were its real parent ?' The answer to such a question must, of course, be in the negative. Under English law, there is no process by which the natural parents can entirely divest them- selves of their rights, or by which, again, a stranger can assume those rights and step exactly into the place vacated. As a consequence of such a want in our legal system, many people who under other circumstances would be only too •• glad to adopt a child, are unwilling to do so. The real parents may declare that they will never want the boy or girl back, but some more absolute security is needed by people prepared to enter into such a relationship. Those who are fond enough of children to desire to adopt them will feel cer- tain that after a few years their sentiments will be every bit as strong as those of real parents. Naturally enough, then, they shrink from the slightest risk of being subjected to any sort of external control. What is attractive in the notion of true adoption is that the child comes to be regarded, both in law and usage, exactly as if it were the flesh and blood of the adopter. All such notion, however, is discountenanced by the English law, which, as we have said before, knows nothing of the principles which obtain in the ancient Roman codes, and in those founded upon them. But if the present state of things can only be regarded as exceedingly unsatisfactory when seen from the point of view of those who desire to adopt, it is still worse when looked at from that of the general public. When a child's parents have proved themselves, either from habitual drunkenness, or flagrant immorality, or from any other such cause, utterly unfit to be its guardians, it is undoubtedly for the good of the community at large that they should be obliged to give up their claims upon their offspring. Such persons are often willing enough at moments of pressure to divest themselves of their parental rights. Unfortunately, however, their resignation of them is not absolute, and their power to interfere with their children can practically be revived when- ever they choose. Bat if a true form of adoption existed, they could often doubtless be induced to divest themselves for good and all of rights they are liable to abuse, and to pass those rights to more worthy persons, and thus many- children could be permanently rescued from evil influences in a manner now impossible.
If any form of adoption is introduced into the law of England, we very much hope that it will be of a nature dif- ferent from that proposed by Lord Meath. The effect of his measure, if passed, would apparently be to give us a sort of inferior foster-parentage---the name is taken from his Bill— conferring rights over the children of a kind more limited than those enjoyed by ordinary parents. This, it seems to us, is a complete mistake. What is really wanted is the recog- nition of a process by which the rights of parents can be transferred unimpaired, and the adopting parents can step exactly into the shoes of those who resign their parental powers and duties. Unless the artificial tie is for all practical purposes made as real and strong as the natural, it will not satisfy that craving in human nature for adoption which evinces itself in so marked a degree even in countries like England, where everything is done to check and nothing to encourage its growth. The law on this subject as it exists in most of the States of the American Union might well serve as a model for English legislation. Speaking generally, the adopted child in America assumes -precisely the position of an ordinary child, except that, though it is the heir of the adopting parents, it cannot inherit from their collateral kindred. The act of adoption is, however, not purely voluntary, but in most States is only made effective by means of a petition filed in a Superior Court. This provision is a very salutary one, as it enables the Court to refuse its sanction if it is not satisfied that the adopter has sufficient means to bring tip the child, that the interests of the child will be promoted, that the person adopting is of good moral character, or that on general grounds the proposed adoption is fit and proper. If the child I
is old enough to give its consent, such consent is usually necessary in America, as, of course, is the consent of both the parents, if 'still living. Immediately after adoption, the status of the child becomes that of the Offspring of the adopter. The legal relation of parent and child is, in fact, established as regards the adopter, and dissolved as regards the natural father and mother, the only limitations being such as are necessary to prevent prohibited marriages with the original kindred.
That an amendment of the existing law of England on some such lines as these would be a very great improvement, we cannot doubt for a moment. It is, -however, particularly necessary to insist that if any change is made in the direction we have been advocating, the consent of a Court of Law shall be made necessary in all cases. The necessity for obtaining such consent—given, say, only on sworn testimony—would prevent the misuse of the power of adoption, and would also act as a formal announcement that the adopter had assumed parental responsibility in respect of a particular child. How necessary it is to guard against misuse, may be realised by any one who stops to consider for a moment the possible effect of allowing a mere voluntary arrangement without any legal sanction to be sufficient. To make adoption a mere matter of signing names to a piece of paper, would be virtually to legalise the sale of children. There are hundreds of things for which children are a marketable article. They are wanted for begging, for acrobatic feats, for acting, for performing household work, for keeping birds off gardens, for running messages. Plenty of needy parents would agree for a few pounds to let their children be adopted by strangers, who would thus enjoy without fear of inter- ference the parental authority of the real fathers and mothers. At present, if such bargains are made, the children can be -redeemed from slavery by invoking the aid of the parents, or by taking action in their names. If, however, as would happen under a true system of adoption, the natural parent were completely divested of all his rights, there would be no such remedy. Before, then, any particular act of adoption is sanctioned, it should always be made plain that such act is for the benefit of the child. Adoption properly safeguarded would, we feel sure, prove an immense benefit in England, and would save many children from hardship and ill-usage ; but without sufficient safeguards it would be better to leave the existing law, bad as it is, uninterfered with. Even those who are most opposed to allowing fathers or mothers to divest themselves of their rights and duties in and to their offspring, ought to remember that there are many children without either fathers or mothers living to protect them, and in such instances even they surely should agree that in the case of orphans there can be no objection to allowing the Roman form of adoption. The present condition of such children is often very distressing. It would, however, be much ameliorated were real adoption allowed. It is to be hoped, then, that if, as we believe, there is agreement on this point, something may be done speedily to amend the law, and allow at least the complete adoption of orphan children.
Previous page
