Greens propose updating Adoption laws

Kevin Hague continues to impress me. He calmly covered the issues in a constructive manner with ACC and now he has put forward a comprehensive bill to modernise out very outdated adoption laws.

People may ask why I care about adoption. Well, my sister is adopted, and my mother was godmother to two adopted twins. So i have a wee bit of an interest in adoption laws:

The Greens have drafted a bill to overhaul adoption laws and allow adoption by same-sex couples, saying legislation about to be debated by Parliament doesn’t guarantee New Zealand’s antiquated legislation will change.

The member’s bill by Kevin Hague would enable gay adoption, something already being considered in two Labour bills already before Parliament by MPs Jacinda Ardern and Louisa Wall.

Hague’s bill is the result of cross party work with National MP Nikki Kaye. Labour was part of that work until MP Jacinda Ardern pulled out of the group last year and drafted her own bill to overhaul adoption laws.

While Hague’s bill has to be drawn from the member’s ballot before it is debated by Parliament, Ardern’s bill is expected to have its first reading within the next month.

Hague today said the Greens would not support Ardern’s bill because it required the Law Commission, which reviewed the 1955 Care of Children Act in 2000, to draft a bill and then for the Minister of Social Development at the time to introduce that legislation.

Even in the best case scenario, under Ardern’s bill it would be two or three years before a law was drafted, he said.

“I don’t think the process adds any advantage. It’s sole advantage is that it is already on the order paper. We already have a bill.”

  • LesleyNZ

    Kevin Hague may well care about adoption and updating the adoption law and he sounded so lovely and nice, but it was pretty obvious that his emphasis is on same sex adoption. I believe that this is his, (and the Green Party’s), main motivation. As usual – a bit of a personal agenda rears it head with some politicans.

  • kelvirsux

    First gay marriage – and marriage was never for the state to tamper with – it is outside of any govt’s jurisdiction. Now same sex couple adoption – a child needs a mother and a father – and yes, there are plenty of examples of hopeless mothers and fathers, but don’t use that as an excuse to tamper with a child’s right to a mother AND a father. We are seeing a real decline in our civilization when basic principles of humankind are being altered to suit political or societal idealism by activists. What will they come up with next? – a bill asking for the right of a man to give birth!!!?

    • Pokerface

      I have an honest belief that a “loving Mother and Father” is the best way to raise a well adjusted child to a well adjusted adult. That said, any loving “parent” is better than no love at all.

  • Redbaiter

    More damn interference from unelected self appointed elitists.

    Why can’t these do-gooding pricks stay out of our lives?

  • Mitch82

    Despite the majority of studies showing equally positive outcomes for children of LGBT Parenting, people are still going to carp on about the decline of civilization.

    Let’s just put the far right in power, repeal women’s voting rights, bring back racial segregation and reinstate slavery. Go back to the good old days.

    • phronesis

      Worth a go, but I doubt that will be enough to save our declining civilisation. It’s all about the demographics and it doesn’t look good.

    • kelvirsux

      This is a reply removed from the topic – this has nothing to do with the far right and is not carping on – this is about the right of a child to have input in their life from a man and a woman, and this is not new – this has been going on for thousands of years – yes, I am sure LGBT can be good parents, and I am not making any judgement on them as people, but the child who has no choice needs to be given the right to have both a mother and a father, that is the point – so leave far right agendas out of it, I couldn’t care one bit for that.

      • Mitch82

        So what moral authority do YOU have to make the decision for children, since they can’t decide for themselves? Is there some non-political, non-religious insight you have that trumps the majority of New Zealanders who are in favor of gay adoption?

        • Mitch82

          Down-voting a comment doesn’t make the issue go away, guys. Sorry.

        • Gayguy

          What gives you the right to choose for a child that they will only have straight parents? What gives you the right to say that a mother cannot use GE to remove defects, or enhance their child’s chances?

          When you were a kid, did your parents allow you a say in how you were raised, or did you have to follow their rules?

      • Gayguy

        A child deserves loving a loving parent/parents. Regardless of sex. A mother and father combination is obsolete thinking.

        • Lion_ess

          A mother and father is not obsolete thinking, this is wishful thinking on your part.

          • Gayguy

            Sigh, why is it your kind are always so dim witted?

            Here I will spell it out for you as well…

            To think that only a mother and father is the only best way to raise a child is obsolete thinking.

          • Lion_ess

            Sigh, only dimwits need to write their comments twice so they make sense

          • Gayguy

            No, smart people have to repeat themselves in many different ways so the dimwits such as yourself can understand.

          • Lion_ess

            You must have two cocks gayguy, you couldn’t be this stupid from pulling one!

          • Gayguy

            My goodness such hostile bile within you. It is no wonder you are what you are.

        • pukakidon

          That is weird thinking, A mother and father combination is obsolete? You are either a nut job or a hater of heterosexual parents!.

          • Gayguy

            How typical of you to deliberately misrepresent someone.

            To think that only a mother and father is the only best way to raise a child is obsolete thinking.


          • pukakidon

            Unlike you Gayguy, I support good parents on both sides, however you have shown that you have a total disregard for good heterosexual parents and your argument is always slanted to trying to prove somehow that thousands of years of good parents have been wrong.

          • Gayguy

            Telling lies now I see.

            I know many good heterosexual parents. Many. Also I have never run good hetro parents down, ever. Unlike the anti gay squad on here I do not target a whole group. Just the negative part of it.

            And any fool who thinks that the ONLY acceptable way to rise a kid is with a mother and a father is just showing how little they understand about loving families of all stripes.

          • pukakidon

            I dont, the sensible thing to do is to allow Gay parents the ability to adopt and then they have to go through the same process as heterosexual parents in the screening process, which I believe is very stringent.

            I would rather see all kids who have no parents go to the best available be they Homo or Hetero.

          • Gayguy

            Good to hear, so please do not assume I label all heterosexual parents as bad.

          • Mark C

            He must be one of those Hetrophobes I’ve heard about…

        • Nigel Sherrie Fairweather-Hunt

          that is a ridiculous, offensive statement. i understand your frustration but that kind of talk is not going to do you any favours.

          a bit like the racist bus driver.

    • Gayguy

      Haters, like those above, are going to hate. No matter what.

      • Kea

        It not about hating anyone, at least in my case. I have nothing against gays, but I will side with mother nature on this one. You want kids, knock yourself out trying to make one of your own. Clearly having a mum & dad is natures way. That is not a moral judgment of gays, it is an observable fact. Labeling people who disagree with you as “haters” will not change the laws of nature.

        • Travis Poulson

          Perhaps nature is a hater too, discriminating against the procreation of homosexuals. How dare it. Homophobic, hateful, bigoted nature. Shame on you, nature!

          • Gayguy

            Immature as ever Travis.

          • Travis Poulson

            Oh don’t be a hater Gayguy.

          • Gayguy

            Oh how typical of Travis.

          • Travis Poulson

            Well yes, very typical of me. I was mocking you and your regurgitated recycled comment retreads.

          • Gayguy

            Better to have stock standard replies for someone like you.

          • Travis Poulson

            “Stock standard”….couldn’t describe you better myself, well done :)

          • Gayguy

            Better to be stock standard than obsolete and filled with spite.

          • Guest

            I’m obsolete and filled with spite only by your assumption, whereas you are stock standard by your own admission. Snap.

          • Gayguy

            Snap? What are you? 8?

        • Gayguy

          Given the number of studies out there that show same sex parents do a fantastic job, the whole “nature” argument is plain nonsense.

          Also years ago many hetro’s couldn’t have children, but now through science they can. Not nature, science. So should those people be prohibited from having kids?

          Nature decided they cannot have children, so should adoption and IVF be illegal then?

          • anon

            Gayguy explain this…kiddy fiddlers are generally males on little gays are very capable of child abuse. Yet they can’t come out? Why?

          • Gayguy

            Being a pedo has very little to do with sexuality and more to do with opportunity. That is not to say there are not gay pedo’s because there are. But more to the point, your question seems to have a particular nastiness to it.

          • anon

            try experience and scars. Also my mother was adopted into a normal family and was abused? Wasn’t nasty – you have rose tinted glasses. It is not about gay adoption…it just the pink are making it that way. Adoption is about the kids not the adoptors…that is what gays don’t understand. You have turned it into a human rights issue…it’s about the kids…gays are so dumb sometimes because they think nothing but about themselves. Oh by the way my sister is gay.

          • Gayguy

            That’s right it is about the kids. And denying homosexual adoption is denying children the right to a loving home.

            Everyone should be allowed to adopt as long as it means the child will be loved and cared for. Denying adoption based on sexuality makes as much sense as denying it based on race. And the sooner the hetro haters understand it is about the kids, not their twisted out dated *cough* “values” the better.

    • Whaleoil

      Let’s not

    • 2ndAmendment

      Hell yeah. At least that way NZ might just break even – no keep on charging towards National and moral bankruptcy.

    • Travis Poulson

      looks like several people took your comment seriously.

    • pukakidon

      You were only going on about how you hated Scottish people and how they were scum and spouting bile towards them and now you come up with this nonsense, you are a hypocrite. How very left of you!!!

      • Travis Poulson

        I don’t think he was serious :)

  • cows4me

    No stuff them, I’ve never seen two bulls have a calf nor two cows. I’m sure the blind wish to see and the deaf wish to hear. The LCBT claim that gayness is inherited genetically, so is stupidity,laws enacted by government don’t turn the stupid into einstein nor can they reverse the laws of nature.They are what god handed out.

  • Andrei

    Let’s see – two spinster, old maid MPs and a Homosexual want to rewrite the way children should be raised.

    Ivory tower idiots, who have never actually done anything of real merit in their shallow sad lives imposing their nonsense on the rest of us and corrupting other peoples children in the process.

    Even as it becomes apparent that Western civilization is on its way out because people have not been raising enough chlldren for the past two generations.

    • Gayguy

      So full of hate and spite.

      • P1LL

        I am all for gay marriage but if sucking,licking or anal cant produce a child then why expect to be able to adopt ? The people who deposit sperm via a penis (part A) into a vagina (part B) who can’t conceive even though they follow the part A into part B should be first in line , they followed the instructions of reproduction.
        Being gay is not a choice, I understand that but being gay will not give you children because part A and part A or part B and Part B can never reproduce

        • Kimbo

          So by that logic does it therefore follow that infertile couples who have a problem in that either or both part A and part B can’t function properly to reproduce shouldn’t be able to adopt either?! If it does it undermines one of the great motivators for adoption.

          I think you may be on stronger ground if you argue that males and females together generally have a range of differing yet complimenting physical and emotional and cognitive differences that together are the ideal norm for a child’s development.

          Just saying…

          • P1LL

            Did you read what I said ?
            “The people who deposit sperm via a penis (part A) into a vagina (part B)
            who can’t conceive even though they follow the part A into part B
            should be first in line” as in first in line to adopt

          • Kimbo

            Yes I read it. But just because you said it, it doesn’t mean that what follows was logical.

            There is a non-sequitir, indeed a flat out contradiction in your following statement, “being gay will not give you children because part A and part A or part B and Part B can never reproduce”.

            Many heterosexual couples can also NEVER (which is the key word in your argument) reproduce.

            Just saying…

          • P1LL

            okay look at it this way , you by a flat pack of lets say a TV stand.
            You follow the instructions to the letter part A into part B and it does not fit , you take it back and you will be given a refund or another flat pack ( you followed the instructions but it didn’t work) no fault of your own . If you try to assemble it with part A into part A or B into B the shop will tell you you are doing it wrong and it wont make a TV stand. Heterosexual sex will more than likely produce offspring , homosexual sex will never produce an offspring .
            If you have tried to follow the ( part A into part B) instructions and It does not work than you have an opportunity to adopt .

          • Kimbo

            “If you have tried to follow the ( part A into part B) instructions and It does not work than you have an opportunity to adopt “.

            OK, that is getting a bit better. However, your argument now depends on the aptness of your analogy (“you by a flat pack of lets say a TV stand”) – which I’d suggest is a flawed analogy, and therefore false.

            I’d suggest the real issue is not whether you have a part A or part B to fit together, faulty or not, but the fact that you went looking to buy/procure/gain something, in this case the analogy of a tv stand/child. And in that regard hetero and same-sex couples would appear to be motivated by the same desire. Whether it is because they were allocated a faulty set of parts, or due to the anatomical reality of the parts that already exist in the package…man, it is definitely time to stop running with your analogy!…the motivation to go looking for what you want as a couple via the process of adoption is the same.

            Personally, I think that rather than arguing from “nature” (which is a bit tricky at times – e.g., “red in tooth and claw”), it is better to focus on what is optimal for kids. Do kids do better in heterosexual or same-sex households, or does it not make a difference? Everything else tends to lend itself to sophistry and ideology, both pro and agin the LGBT community.

    • blazer

      people are far too busy working to make money to pay their mortgages to stop and smell the flowers and take time to raise children.The greed of financial fraudsters is the real reason Western civilization is on the way ‘out’!

  • Tristanb

    Being able to adopt a child is not a “human right”.

    It may be something you are allowed do if you’re fit to adopt a child, (or as happens a lot, you’re a couple who gets an unwanted kid from a friend/relative, and it’s done informally without paperwork).

    But a child is not something you have a right to have (i.e. the state has no obligation to give you a kid just because you want one). We really need to hash out what a “right” is, because you have the right to have (i.e. if you have one, the state can’t ordinarily take it from you) a child too.

    [Two different meanings of “right”: one means state has to give you this, the other means state has to allow you to have this.]

  • steve and monique

    Have had a look at most of the posts,and can see most feel two people of the same sex should not be allowed to adopt.Ok,so we can agree that children should have a stable,loving caring environment to grow up in.Guess two people in love who have this to offer is a good thing.Children need good role models to provide a positive foundation to achieve etc in life.And how their parents act as a couple, to show them how to interact with their future partner(s)is important.I guess just good parenting in general.Ok from an adoptees perspective,who when born is taken from their mother,which they have bonded with pre birth,and past on to stranger(anouther female)and has to learn to bond/love that person/and their partner.And in the future, no matter how much this new family supports,and loves that child,they know they are different from them.And given the bias/discrimination towards Gays,how is this going to impact on that child at school etc..Do you all think giving a baby to a gay male couple is a great idea,as I am not so sure.Seems to me a better option would be a lesbian couple,as mothers are the greatest gift a child can have.and at least that covers one of the required bases. And by the way I was adopted,and know in myself that if I could not be raised by my Birth mother,then I was glad I got the mum I did.SHE was the Best(Dad was ok to).

  • SaggyNaggy

    Couldn’t care less about whether gay couples can adopt or not. The real damage of this bill will be making open adoption the default, and probably giving biological parents rights they should not have. These people adopt out for a reason, and that reason is that they cannot be fit parents themselves, by their own admission. It is grossly irresponsibile to give them a right or say in the child’s life.

  • LesleyNZ

    These days in NZ there are hardly any children to adopt. Wished that the unborn baby (who could be adopted) and the unborn baby’s status was considered to be of value and important enough for Kevin Hague (and his Green Party and other politicians) to care about. If the unborn baby were a tree – he/she would be saved. Bunch of hypocrites – all this so-called caring about the adoption act and yet they couldn’t care less about the main reason why there are so few babies to adopt. Kevin Hague does cares about getting a vote in the next election from those same-sex couples who want to have a baby. If he was just as vocal about the unborn baby then yes – he would be impressive.