Adopting new family values

WHEN Carol and Mark decided they wanted to adopt a child, there was one hurdle they had to surmount before they could even start the lengthy process of being approved as prospective parents - they had to get hitched. Although happy to get their marriage certificate, without their dream of adoption they would have been content to have remained in unmarried bliss.

The couple - whose names have been changed - have now adopted a child through Barnardos in the North-East. But unmarried couples could soon be spared from having to get married if they want to adopt.

Health Secretary Alan Milburn told the House of Commons yesterday that MPs would be allowed a free vote about whether to allow unmarried couples, including gay couples, to become adoptive parents. The Darlington MP has already said he would favour the move, on the grounds it would mean more children could be adopted, despite cries from some quarters that it will undermine the traditional family unit.

Barnardos itself has been one of the groups pressing for the change, expected to be included in an amendment to the Adoption and Children Bill.

"A change in the law would open up more resources for children, because people perceive that they can't adopt unless they're married," says Sue Holton, deputy leader of Barnardos' adoption project in the North-East.

"We still encourage unmarried couples to go through the process and become approved as adopters, but it means only one of them can become a legal adopter, and if something happened to the legal adopter, the other parent would not have the rights that the birth parents would."

Whereas married adoptive parents are given the same rights as birth parents, for unmarried couples this applies only to the legal adopter. And while their partner can take out a court order to assume parental responsibilities, this can lead to problems in areas including inheritance and taking the child out of the country. Some partners have even found they have been refused permission to act as next of kin by hospitals if the child has an accident, or have been treated differently by schools.

'This would open up another set of adopters," says Sue. "There are lots of different family situations out there now, and different family structures have become the norm - they're not better or worse, just different, and we need a variety of family placements.

"You also have to look at the statistics for breakdown in marriage. While some people might see marriage as the ideal, it is becoming less and less prevalent.

"It is not that we shouldn't be striving for the ideal, but we want children to have secure, loving homes, regardless of whether their parents are married or not. We make assessments of people and everybody should be judged according to their merits."

And if the proposals are approved, this would open up the way for gay couples to adopt, she says. "We would look at their application, and we would not turn them down as a matter of course.

"It is the same with single parent families. There are lots of single parent families and children without either a mother or a father, and we would assess each individual on their merits."

But Alan Milburn's announcement comes after the Government originally rejected moves to give unmarried couples equal rights on adoption, and family values campaigners are aghast at the change of opinion. Colin Hart, director of the Newcastle-based Christian Institute, believes the reversal is the direct result of pressure from the gay rights lobby.

"There is no organisation lobbying for heterosexual cohabitees to be able to adopt - it is all from the gay rights groups," he says. "I think this would be an absolute disaster. Children need stability and they need a mother and a father."

While he recognises that some children have been so traumatised by abuse that they cannot cope with two carers, for most a placement with a married couple is preferable to the alternative. And he says the small number of unmarried and gay couples who would come forward for adoption would not make a significant difference to the number of children looking for adoptive parents.

"With gay couples, you are deliberately denying children a mother and a father. Children need a mother and a father, that is the order of nature," he says.

"There are a number of tragedies, and some children are brought up in single parent families, but we should not go out to create families where the children are denied a mother and a father.

"There is very strong public disapproval of all the gay rights issues, and this is one where there is most opposition. Polls show that 84 per cent of the public are opposed to allowing homosexual men to adopt children. And just 0.2 per cent of households are same sex couples, so the idea that this is going to empty the care homes is wrong."

He says research shows that children do better where their family includes a mother and father. But unmarried straight couples also have disadvantages.

"Cohabitation is only a transient state. Three out of five people who live together go on to get married, and of those who don't, 83 per cent break up within ten years. The outcomes for children are not as good where their parents cohabit as where they are married, although they are not as bad as same sex couples," he says.

But allowing unmarried couples to adopt is about the rights of children in care, and not the rights of prospective parents, according to Barbara Hutchinson, deputy director of the British Association for Adoption and Fostering. She says there are about 5,000 children considered suitable for adoption, but unable to find adoptive parents.

"If you are an unmarried couple you are assessed as a couple but only one of you becomes the adoptive parent, and that puts off a lot of people. They find this out and they don't go any further," she says.

"And even if they do, it means only one of them has a legal and enduring relationship with the child, and that is not good news for them or the child. It can also cause tension, with 'you are not my dad' arguments. Emotionally and legally it has an impact."

While the partner who is not the legal adopter can be given parental responsibility by court order, this lasts only until the child is 16, creating further uncertainty.

"For a child who has had lots of changes, it doesn't feel very permanent to say you can only be their dad until they are 16, and then somebody else can come along and challenge the order," she says.

"This is absolutely about the needs of children. All we are asking for is the right of unmarried couples to apply, and then they would be assessed as any married couple would.

"You would look at all the indicators and the personal references and the record of stability and commitment. You would not say every unmarried couple would make good adopters, just as not every married couple would."

And while gay couples can apply to adopt as individuals, allowing them to adopt as a couple would provide a further pool of potential adopters, she says.

"It is not about the rights of gay people, it is about the needs of children, and experience demonstrates that many same sex couples can provide very good stability.

"Some children have very difficult pasts and would struggle in a traditional two-parent family. We need a wide range of adopters and this is about having the right to apply.

"But this is absolutely not about adult rights. It is about 5,000 children needing families."