Despite the wide consultation process held two years ago before amending the Civil Code, certain adoption problems had still not been tackled, including the modification of the adoption leave so that part of it could be utilised during the pre-adoption process and financial assistance to couples to help them carry the burden of the expenses involved.

Speaking during the debate on the Civil Code (Amendment) Bill, opposition spokesperson on the family Justyne Caruana also criticised the government’s delay in presenting the Bill. She said Family Minister Dolores Cristina had failed to answer that eight parliamentary questions by members of the opposition.

The Bill seeks to bring into force the provision of the judgment delivered by the Constitutional Court on April 3, 2009, in a case instituted by a couple against the Department for Social Welfare Standards and the Minister for Social Policy. The court had upheld the decision of an inferior court that certain provisions were discriminatory against married couples.

Dr Caruana said that adoption cases always presented difficult situations and often were a source of tension between spouses. While in Italy there existed an agency, CIFA, which helped parents to tackle problems in the adoption process, this was not the case in Malta.

She complained about delays caused in the adoption process, including delay in presenting the home study report. She appealed the adoptions board to hasten the process.

The agency Appoġġ was efficient in its work but the existing workload put pressure on its resources.

Another problem was that there were couples who qualified for adoption but could not do so because of the age limit. It was unfair to subject couples to more expenses to get the board’s expert report when this would be similar to the home study report for which they would have already paid. She suggested financial aid to such couples.

Dr Caruana concluded that where court scrutiny was final there was no need to impose a limit of three months for the adopted child to be residing with the family.

Earlier, Parliamentary Secretary Clyde Puli said that it was important to protect adopted children. The Hague Convention ensured that adoptions were made in the children’s interest. International cooperation helped to regulate adoption across countries.

Adoptions in Malta could be made from seven countries which had ratified the Hague Convention and from eight others. They could only be made after the adoption process had been finalised in the original country, including consensus by the children’s natural parents.

There were established criteria under which parents qualified for adoption. This was done to ensure the psychological health of the adopted child.

Mr Puli concluded that Malta had to ensure that children who were living in vulnerable situations were protected.

Narionalist MP Stephen Spiteri said that the Bill was one that created a better life for both prospective adoptive parents and children. It took into consideration both sides of the coin – the couples who wanted to adopt, and the children. When it came to law enforcement and regulation, it was the members of parliament’s responsibility towards the children that called for as much sensitivity as possible in decision-making as this would affect their maturity and development. Their rights needed to be protected.

Turning to foster care, Dr Spiteri said the current number of children having to resort to entering a new family was not alarming but numbers were on the increase. He emphasised on the importance of having an interdisciplinary system to differentiate betwen fostering and adoption.

Research had shown that children enjoyed a better quality of life in a family environment than in other forms of institutions such as crèches and residential homes, despite the professionalism of the latter. He went on to say that the adoption unit in the social welfare standards department was performing at a high standard. More caution was needed with information provided in cases of intercountry adoption.

The government already created social studies and psychology courses , among others. Thus, the country was producing more professionals who could tackle these issues in a professional manner. Another practical measure introduced was the creation of Appoġġ agency, whose interdisciplinary team allowed for more transparency as it was a service provider and a separate entity from the regulator.

The Children’s Commissioner said positive results were resulting in more efficiency. One should not neglect the fact that adoptive parents needed the adequate skills to raise children and more attention should be given to this isue, especially in cases where the parents are adopting for the first time.

He called for more scrutiny measures to ensure adequacy of the couple adopting were re-quired.

Dr Spiteri concluded that this Bill was beneficial to all involved in the process and created a better balance and further rights for the parents as well as children – a balance that would result in a stronger society that layed its foundations on the family element, with the main focus remaining the advantages for children.

The debate continues.