Trouw

23-01-1995

5

Why is Maneka Gandhi, the minister of women and child development, determined to shift the process of adoption of children out of the domain of the courts and place it under the control of an executive magistrate (district collector)?

Adoption, as defined in Section 2(2) of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, “means the process through which the adopted child is permanently separated from his biological parents and becomes the lawful child of his adoptive parents with all the rights, privileges and responsibilities that are attached to a biological child”.

Severing of ties with an existing family and creating permanency in a new family requires due diligence and precaution. These concerns have been addressed by the Supreme Court of India, the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) and the Ministry of Women and Child Development (MWCD) in the past. Obviously, Gandhi thinks differently and feels the judicial process is cumbersome and time-consuming and so believes that the executive magistrate will help expedite this process.

The minister, however, seems to overlook the fact that the overworked district collector is already busy with the task of implementing over 100 separate programmes. He/she is hardly in a position to be able to personally scrutinise and verify every document for adoption. The chances are that he/she will hand over the task of scrutinising this to juniors.

Also, at the district-level, the executive magistrate is a nomenclature that is used to cover several revenue officials, including even tehsildars. Will tehsildars now decide which child is to be given in adoption to which family?

After a couple from Malta was denied permission to adopt a one-year-old from an orphanage in KR Puram, they moved the High Court and finally got the go-ahead to add ‘Nicholas Dhruva Schembri’ to their family of four.

The High Court allowed Joseph and Deborah Schembri to adopt the boy who lives in Shishu Mandir, KR Puram, setting aside a lower court order that had barred from adoption on the grounds of age, income and cultural differences. It said that the lower court had “acted illegally and with material irregularity” in the case.

The couple had filed a petition before the LVII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, seeking to adopt, Dhruva. The couple has been married since 1995 and has two children, born in 1998 and 2000. Looking to add to their family, the two had obtained permission from the Ministry of Family and Social Solidarity in Malta for adoption.

The issue reached the HC when the petition was rejected by the civil court on the grounds that the “adoption was not in the best interest of the child” as the couple were aged 44 years each and had grown children “and that it is a complete family; and there is no reason or necessity for them to adopt a child”.

The couple’s advocate submitted that the lower court had failed to consider their affidavits that “stated that they undertake to bring up the child as their own son and to give him a good home and sound education and to look after his physical, mental and moral well-being”. The home study report had stated that the couple was financially stable and able to cope with the expenses related to maintaining a family. This was also overlooked by the trial court, the HC was told.

Adoption fulfils two of man's deepest needs - the craving for parenthood and a child's desire to belong.

Add to that the pressures of the 21st century and it is not surprising that Indian children are increasingly being adopted by the richest countries. Inter-country adoption, in fact, is a highly profitable business.

In the US and Denmark, the number of Indian children being adopted has grown in the past few years. In 1999-2000, the traffic to the US more than doubled and increased by a third to Denmark.

Since 1969, 15 per cent of adoptions by the Swedish agency Adoptions Centrum were from India. India follows Colombia and Philippines in the number of children being adopted by Norwegians since 1972.

.

Documentation presentation

ISS/IRC Code

COM-INTL-ADOPT ENG-042

Partner

Title

gang who said they could arrange a baby in exchange for a few thousand rupees.

Hyderabad | Written by Uma Sudhir | Updated: December 23, 2017 00:42 IST

Hyderabad: A baby selling racket has been busted in Hyderabad, in which a child trafficking gang identified girls while still in the womb and found buyers for them, putting a price on their head even before they are born. NDTV tracked this gang over the last six months.

As part of a sting operation, NDTV set up a fictitious office space in Hyderabad to capture on camera the child trafficking gang who said they could arrange a baby in exchange for a few thousand rupees.

Sponsored Content

A woman has complained to the Hassan police that her child was forcibly taken away from her by a specialised adoption agency in the district and has demanded that she get her child back.

Shwetha (24), said that she had delivered a baby boy on February 11. Three days after the delivery, Dr. H.K. Phalaksha, a paediatrician, who runs Thavaru Public Charitable Trust, the adoption agency, took her baby away and forcibly put him up for adoption. “I had not signed the papers that the doctor brought. In fact, he took my thumb impression, though I could have signed my name,” she said.

Shwetha’s husband had passed away three years ago. She was in a live-in relationship with another person, with whom she had the baby. The complainant has also accused V. Geetha, Deputy Director, Department of Women and Child Development, Veena and Jayashree – both counsellors at a women’s care centre, where Shwetha had stayed during her pregnancy, of a role in the alleged abduction.

The mother met the Superintendent of Police in Hassan on Friday. The police have called in Dr. Phalaksha and the others for an inquiry. So far, nobody has been arrested.

Doctor denies allegation

AHMEDABAD: Vastrapur police on Thursday arrested four persons in connection with the abduction of a one-year-old boy from a footpath near Hebatpur Circle. Investigators said that the boy, the son of labourers, was given to a childless couple and the deal was finalized for Rs 1 lakh.

The couple had paid Rs 50,000 but when they learned about abduction of a boy matching the description, they abandoned the child in an auto. The auto driver handed over the boy to Adalaj police.

null According to Vastrapur police, a team led by sub-inspector M A Vaghela got information that four accused involved in the abduction case are near their residence at Gujarat Housing Board near Gota. The Vastrapur police team along with a team from Sola police station reached the spot and rounded up Jignesh Parmar, 23, Sangeeta Chauhan, 52, Poonam Baraiya, 30, and Jitendra Mehta, 45, all residents of Gujarat Housing Board colony at Gota.

"In preliminary questioning, they said that the boy was abducted while he was sleeping on January 11, from Hebatpur. They had come to know that a childless couple was seeking to adopt a child. They had promised the couple a child and that they would complete the paperwork required. The couple had agreed to pay Rs 1 lakh to Parmar and had given Rs 50,000 in advance," said Vaghela.

When the group gave the child to the couple they asked for the documents and said they will pay the remaining money only after the paperwork was complete. Meanwhile, the couple read in a newspaper about the abduction of a child matching the child they had received and realized he was abducted.

Smriti Gupta, adoption activist and counsellor.

Smriti Gupta, adoption activist and counsellor.(HT?Photo)

Adoption activist and counsellor Smriti Gupta, 37, criticises the moral degradation of society of either looking at adoption as a helpless resort or a preference-based market for children. Speaking to Hindustan Times, the mother of two adopted children shatters the myths related to adoption with facts covering India.

What is the issue with child preference in adoption, in India?

Preferences are usually provided as options to parents while registering, but sometimes this could also be the shortcoming in the process. For instance, most parents prefer to adopt babies, citing reasons like bonding or adjustment issues, or to experience the feeling of bringing up a child. And, statistically, only 103 children below two years of age, out of a monthly pool of 1,525 adoptable children in India, as per the recent data, thus increasing the wait time. Personally, I feel all this can be fulfilled even with a slightly older child. Also, preferences are made with respect to gender, states and so on.

??? ??????? : 9 ?? 25 ????? ?? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ????? ?????? ?? ????? ???? ?? ??? ??. ?????? ????? ?????? ?? ??? ??? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??? ????? ?????? ?? ?????? ?????? ???? ??????? ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ?? ????? ?? ???? ??????? ?????? ??? ??????? ???? ?? ??? ????? ??.

?????? ????? ?????? ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ????? ??? ?? ?? ??? ???? ??. ??? ????? ?? ????? ?? ??????. ????? ????? ??? ??????? ?? ???????? ??? ???-????? ?? ??????? ???? ????-???? ?? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ???? ???.

?? ????? ?????? ???? ??? ?? 8 ??? ??? ?? ?? ??? ?? ??? ?? ???? ??. ????? ?? ?? ??????? ?? ??? ??? ??? ?? ?? ???? ????-???? ????? ?? ???? ???? ??? ?? ???? ?? ??????? ?????? ?? ????? ??? ??.

32 ??? ?? ???? ??? ?? ???????? ??? 500 ???? ?? ??? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ?? ??? ?????????? ???? ??. ????????? ????? ?? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ???????? ?? ????????????? ?? ?? ???? ????? ?? ???? ????-???? ?? ????????.

????????? ????? ?? ?? ?? ?? ???? ?????? ??? ?? ????? ?? ???, ?? ?????? ?? ?? ??? ?? ??? ???? ??. ?? ?? 5 ??? ?? ????, ?? ???? ?? ????-???? ?? ??? ??? ?? ???? ???? ????? ??? ??? ??.