sou · GRB349d1 · 2004-01-01 00:00:00 — It is important that the association does not prevent any group of individuals from becoming members. As regards circumstances in the foreign country there is today no regulation. We propose that a Swedish association be granted authorisation to work with intercountry adoption in another country on condition that the other country has adoption legislation or other reliable regulation based on the basic principles of the best interests of the child as expressed in The Convention on the Rights of the Child and in The Hague Convention. The other country must also have a functioning administration for intercountry adoption work, and damaging competition for children must not arise, nor competition between Swedish associations operating in that country. The Swedish association must account for how its costs in the country are apportioned, and on the basis of the cost picture, and the balance between the Swedish associations and other general circumstances it should be judged suitable for the association to begin or continue adoption work with the other country. A condition for the Swedish associations to be able to render account for a sufficiently detailed cost picture is that the countries of origin are open and provide financial information to the association. A Swedish association granted authorisation to work in intercountry adoption in another country will be allowed to work in that country only if the competent authority in the other country has given its consent to this. We also propose that an authorised association should have an obligation to disclose information, an obligation to mediate, and an obligation to provide documentation. The association must moreover in each instance be able to reimburse all adoption fees paid and possess the financial means otherwise to wind up the association. Clearer and more detailed conditions of authorisation increase the opportunities of the adoption authority to act. In order to be able to exercise supervision the authority however needs more supervisory tools. We consider that the authority must be given the right to acquire information necessary for supervision, right of access to the associations offices and the right to demand redress. NIAs organisation (Chap. We propose that be wound up as a board with broad political and civic composition and that the government create a completely new authority with responsibility for intercountry adoption questions. The new authority should have the management structure of a single director agency with a supervisory board. In the instructions for the new authority the task of facilitating adoption in of children from abroad should be changed to the task of supervising the Swedish authorised associations work in intercountry adoption intermediation and ensuring it is carried on in accordance with the law and the principle of the childs best interest as this has been expressed in The Convention on the Rights of the Child and in The Hague Convention. The authority should moreover only disburse state grants to associations that actually mediate children. Our brief includes a review of NIAs organisation. is a board with broad political and civic composition run by a committee with eleven members nominated by the Swedish parliament. Six of the members are nominated by the parliamentary parties, of which one is chairman of the committee. NIAs secretariat has nine employees. The government has stated that the management form of a board with broad political and civic composition is appropriate for some activities but should be employed sparingly. Reappraisal of certain existing boards of this kind may be carried out on suitable occasions. The authority that in future should be responsible for questions of intercountry adoption should in our opinion in principle have the same tasks as today according to its instruction. On the basis of the tasks of the authority we judge however that, from a legal viewpoint, there is no longer any need for the authority to be organised as a board with broad political and civic composition. are there other reasons for retaining its present management form. Our opinion is that the question of intercountry adoption is best dealt with by its own authority, which has a clear task with responsibility for questions of intercountry adoption and work as a central authority according to The Hague Convention. International adoption touches on ethically intractable areas, where it is important that as a nation indicates clear boundaries for what is acceptable from a Swedish perspective. The decisions of the authority in, above all, questions of authorisation could be of a sensitive nature, and the authority works within a complicated field and with many overseas contacts. motivate powerful public control over its work. The management form of a board with limited liability would be possible in this context, but it has been criticised for its vagueness on the question of liability. The exercise of authority should be characterised by clear managerial liability. In relation to the associations and private individuals to whom the authoritys decisions will be directed, it is important that the managerial liability is unequivocal. Against this background we consider that the management form of a single director agency with supervisory board would be suitable for the authority. This would provide the possibility of supervision of the work. At the same time the question of liability would be clearer than at present. The opportunity for supervision can be valuable, as the authority has to deal with questions to do with international cooperation, and in certain cases sensitive questions in which associations and individuals are affected. It is necessary to have clear legislation and a well-balanced supervisory board. Research results as a basis for our proposals in Chaps. , Professor in child and youth psychiatry has been commissioned by us to make a compilation of important research in the field of adoption. The compilation is to be found in part 2 of this report. The research shows that the great majority of adoptees do not have any major problems. Adoptees are however 2–3 times over represented in the clinical material in child and youth psychiatry and in social day care. The boys show aggression, defiance, hyperactivity and asocial behaviour, while the girls have more depressive symptoms, thoughts of suicide and attempted suicides. Interview studies do not provide such unambiguous results. Several studies have shown that abuse, malnutrition, neglect, emotional and intellectual deprivation before adoption affect the childs adjustment even after several years in the adoptive family. It has been shown that the occurrence of such negative experiences, rather than age on arrival in itself, has a strong link to how the adoptees life will develop. School problems are often the result of language difficulties, but hyperactivity and attention deficit are also more common among adoptees, which makes schoolwork difficult. Adoptees may have difficulties in integrating their ideas about their biological family and their experiences of their adoptive family during childhood. It may also be difficult for them for example to identify themselves with two origins and/or cultures. Adoptive parents can facilitate the identification process by involving themselves in the culture of the country of origin etc. Parental training before adoption (Chap. We propose that it becomes obligatory for the person(s) wishing to adopt to take part in municipal parental training before adoption for consent to be granted. The municipalities should be responsible for providing this training. Parental training before adoption is presently provided by the authorised associations. In connection with the municipalitys home study into the person(s) wishing to adopt the investigating officer should assure himself that the person(s) investigated has/have sufficient knowledge of children and their needs. The quality of parental training is dependent on the individual circle- leader and can therefore vary considerably. The opportunity of participating in parental training varies countrywide, as does the content of the training and its cost. In a case of intercountry adoption society is participating in the creation of a family. It is therefore also reasonable that society should make demands of the prospective adoptive parents with the aim that the child will have the best possible conditions in its new home. All adoptees have the right to come to well prepared parents, who have been made aware of intercountry adoption as a phenomenon and what ethical and personal considerations should be taken into account before adoption. From the research findings in this field it appears important that the person(s) wishing to adopt are made aware of the increased risk of various problems in adoptees, so that they are prepared to recognise and cope with different situations, and so that they can seek help at an early stage. From the viewpoint of the best interests of the child we consider that participation in parental training before adoption should be a condition for consent being given. All prospective adoptive parents have the right to parental training of such a quality that, after training, they will have the possibility of taking a decision on whether adoption is right in their case. It is totally unsuitable that society trusts that actors with their own interests in adoption intermediation are those associations providing the training. It must be ensured that all prospective adoptive parents receive training of a high standard, that this training is of a similar quality across the country, and that it focuses on the special requirements of adopted children. We cannot therefore arrive at any conclusion other than that society has to provide parental training in order to guarantee independence, objectivity and professionalism in the training. In our view the local municipalities should provide training based on materials produced centrally. The municipalities should have the right to make a reasonable charge for participation in the training. Cooperation between municipalities and municipal cooperation with the county council are desirable in order to achieve a certain scale for the work, and to make use of child health cares knowledge of e.g. attachment. Home studies before adoption and decisions on consent (Chap.9) We propose that, in order for consent to be granted, the person(s) wishing to adopt should have participated in municipal parental training before adoption, should have satisfactory knowledge and insights into adoptees and their needs, be less than 42 years of age at the time of application, and on the basis of all circumstances should be suitable to adopt. We further propose that the county administrative board should be the body deciding on consent. The home study of the prospective adopter(s) is carried out by the municipal social services department, and decisions on consent are taken by the social welfare board. This type of matter is rare in most municipalities. Even in municipalities with a larger number of adoption cases, the cases for organisational reasons are often unusual for both investigating officers and decision-makers. We consider that the municipalities have a great deal to gain by cooperating e.g. on home studies for consent to adopt. By cooperating, a smaller number of investigating officers can work more frequently on this type of investigation. There are also greater opportunities to tailor training on adoption-related matters, reach out to affected groups with this training, and also greater opportunities for an exchange of experiences across the country. A smaller number of investigating officers would provide a more even quality of investigation, and the work would also be carried out more efficiently. County administrative board supervision would also be facilitated. We consider that a condition for consent being granted is that the person(s) wishing to adopt should possess satisfactory knowledge of and insights into adoptees and their needs. As can be seen in the previous section, the person(s) wishing to adopt should also have participated in municipal parental training on adoption. We consider moreover that, from the childs perspective, advanced age in the person(s) wishing to adopt can in itself be sufficient grounds for consent not being granted. Against this background we consider that the person wishing to adopt should be less than 42 years of age at the time of the application for consent to be granted. A somewhat higher age can be accepted in special circumstances. Finally we consider that in the law on social services (2001:453) it should be clear that the person(s) wishing to adopt must be suited to adopt. The assessment of suitability should be made taking all circumstances into account. There is no automatic right for adults to be able to adopt a child. Assessing whether a person(s) wishing to adopt is/are suited to adopt is difficult, and it is easy to assume an adult perspective, especially when there is no particular child to take a view on. Against the background of the difficulty of assessing whether a person(s) wishing to adopt is/are suited to adopt, we consider that there are reasons for considering which social actor is best suited to take decisions on consent, and how the decision-maker can be provided with the information on adoptees and their particular need in order to be able to take as their starting point the best interests of the child. We list different possible decision-makers. The decision-makers at local level could be the social welfare board, at a regional level the county administrative board and at central level the authority responsible for questions of intercountry adoption. In order to be able to give priority to the best interests of the child, it is our view that those taking the decision on consent must have a good knowledge of both childrens needs in general and adoptees particular needs. In our opinion it is not realistic to demand that the social welfare boards in all of 290 municipalities should possess all the particular knowledge of adoptees that we consider is required in order to take well-founded decisions on consent, as this is a question of a small group of cases. If the decisions instead were to be taken regionally, it is our view that a sufficiently good knowledge base of adoption and adoptees needs can be built up without actions requiring large amounts of resources. The risk is reduced of great variations as regards the processing of the cases, and a more unified practise can develop. We propose therefore that the county administrative board should take decisions on granting consent. In order to meet the high requirement of legality it may be suitable that the county administrative boards create special committees with the task of deciding on consent. Such a committee could be composed of various experts in the field, and it may also be suitable that the public interest is represented. Support and help after an adoption – post-adoption service (Chap.10) Society accepts and legitimises intercountry adoptions. It is important that society meets the needs of adoptees and adoptive parents at as early a stage as possible. Since 1998 the municipalities social welfare boards have had special responsibility for adopted children and young people. The support from the welfare board should include a social worker with a good knowledge of the special circumstances of adoptees and of the adoptive family, who can act as a partner in a dialogue and providing support e.g. in relationship problems within the family, difficulties in the parental role and in life crises deriving from the adoption. We consider that everyone who in their profession meets adoptees and adoptive parents should have a general knowledge of adoptees and that those working with support and treatment of adoptees and adoptive parents must have special knowledge of adoptees. It is important that the state participates in the development of this knowledge. By far the greatest numbers of adoptees live their lives in the same way as those who have grown up in their original family. All adoptees have to come to terms with their adoption, however, and at different stages of their lives there may be a need for support from society in order for them to cope with difficulties of various kinds. Since 1 January 1998 the municipalities social welfare boards have, according to Chapter 5 paragraph 1 of the on , an explicit responsibility for providing help that may be needed after an adoption. Several social workers state that it is not clear what is meant by support and help. In most municipalities there is no structured activity for support and help after an adoption. The aim of providing support and help is in our opinion that the donor contributes to the recipients solution of a problem or to his coping with a situation in a better way. The social welfare boards support and help may include a social worker with a good knowledge of the special circumstances of adoptees and of the adoptive family, providing tips on different attitudes and suitable literature. The social worker can also be a partner in a dialogue. Examples of situations when support may be needed are in relationship problems within the family, difficulties in the parental role and in life crises deriving from the adoption. The responsibility of the social welfare board according to Chapter 5, paragraph 1 of the on does not include adult adoptees. As the municipality has the ultimate responsibility for provision of support and help to those in need living within its area, it is suitable to make use of the existing knowledge of adoption within the municipality also as regards adult adoptees. It is important that everyone who in their profession encounters adoptees should have a general knowledge of adoptees, and that everyone who works with e.g. support or treatment of adoptees also has specific knowledge of adoptees, so that the requirements for support and treatment can be met in time and in a good way. Even as regards support and help we would wish to stress that municipalities have a great deal to gain by cooperating firstly with each other and secondly with the county council. Through this cooperation a regional support and help operation with specialist knowledge of adoptees can be built up. Organisation and execution in the work on adoption-related questions. We stress that most municipalities have a lot to gain from cooperating firstly with each other and secondly with the county council on adoption-related issues. We propose that municipalities and country councils cooperating on these matters should be able to apply for and be awarded a state incentive grant over several years. As is evident from the previous section, adoption-related matters rarely arise for most municipalities and for child health care. In order to achieve a certain scale in the municipalitys work on adoption-related questions, most municipalities have a lot to gain by cooperating with each other. Municipal cooperation with the county council in parental training and support and help operations can be profitable for both sides. In regional cooperation on adoption-related matters those people working with these questions can receive the specialist knowledge necessary to meet the needs of adoptees and their families. By the expression regional adoption counselling we mean a regional operation in which municipalities in cooperation provide parental training before adoption, home study before approval, and support and help after an adoption. The expression is not tied to any special form of cooperation. The county might comprise a suitable geographical basis for cooperation on regional adoption counselling between the municipalities comprising the county and the county council child health care. A very important task for adoption counselling is also to actively disseminate knowledge about adoption to various professional groups who come into contact with adoptees and adoptive parents. In order to encourage the of cooperation we propose that the municipalities and county councils cooperating with each other on adoption matters should be able to apply for and be awarded a state incentive grant which should be paid over several years. Research and development of knowledge (Chap. We propose that a national centre for research and knowledge on intercountry adoption be established. A centre of this kind may with advantage be linked to already existing operations. Hitherto the state has not prioritised research and knowledge development in the area of adoption. This is unacceptable when this involves the organised movement of children from one country to another. If is to have intercountry adoption in the future it will be necessary for the state to prioritise these questions. We propose the of a national centre for research and knowledge on intercountry adoption. The ultimate goal of the centre would be that adoptees receive the best possible conditions during their childhood and youth in their new home country through a better knowledge base. Some important tasks for the centre may be to maintain contact with the field of adoption in order to understand the needs for research, keep up to date with international research, ensure that new findings are made available to those interested in the field of adoption, and to act as a bank of knowledge for the municipalities adoption-related work. In order to acquire dignity and legitimacy the centre should be linked to a scientific environment where interdisciplinary research and knowledge development can be pursued, and where a dialogue becomes possible with clinical work. It is important that adoptees themselves can be heard, firstly in prioritising the research projects and secondly in the research itself, so that the situation of adoptees is not only described by adoptive parents and professionals. We provide examples of existing institutions which could house a research and knowledge centre. Grants towards the costs of adoption – age limit etc. (Chap.13) We propose that the age limit for the grant towards the costs of adoption should not be raised. We propose that in another regulation the government should consider whether it is still motivated that the grant towards the costs of adoption should be paid in private adoptions. Since 1 January 1989 a state grant has been paid towards the adoption of children from abroad. The grant amounts at present to per adopted child, and is paid out when the adoption is complete. is only paid for children not yet ten years of age when the adoptive parents receive the child into their care. Included in our brief is to examine whether the age limit for the grant should be raised. Most adoptions of children older than nine years are private adoptions. In private adoptions the cost picture, against the background of those situations that might arise, is in all likelihood completely different from an adoption through an authorised association. As a result of this we judge that there is no reason to raise the age limit. The few adoptions of children older than nine years of age mediated through authorised associations do not warrant adopting a different position. Against the background that private adoptions may now only occur if there are special reasons, it is reasonable to assume that the costs of these adoptions are usually lower than for adoption through an authorised association. We propose that the government should consider whether it is still motivated for the grant towards adoption costs to be paid in cases of private adoption. Other matters (Chap.14) The adoptees interest groups constitute an important complement to the work society is responsible for.