The Nordic Adoption Council (NAC) is an association of adoption organizations in the Nordic countries. Its purpose is to work for good conditions for international adoptions in the Nordic countries. Its work must be based on the fundamental principles of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child of 1989 and the Hague Convention of 1993 on the Protection of Children and on Cooperation in International Adoptions. The work of the NAC is led by a board that is elected/appointed for a 2-year period. The Board of Directors consists of an elected chairman, a nominated representative from each of the five Nordic countries and any. an additional member. During the current parliamentary term, the extra member is a representative of Adoption and Society, while as a member of DanAdopt's Board of Directors, I have been appointed to take care of the Danish organizations' interest in the Nordic adoption cooperation.
At the NAC Board we have for some time had the EU's position on international adoptions on the agenda. This is mainly due to the entire process of adoptions of children from Bulgaria and Romania during the period up to these two countries' accession to the EU. As you know, this process resulted in the fact that there are now virtually hermetically closed off for adoptions from the 2 countries. It is also a fact that this result is directly linked to the two countries' accession negotiations with the EU. But does this indicate that the EU has a hostile attitude towards international adoptions? That is what we have set out to investigate.
We start by going back to the autumn of 2005, when the NAC was represented at a conference in The Hague, the purpose of which was to discuss the practical application of the above-mentioned Hague Convention in both donor and recipient countries. Here, a representative of the European Union presented the Commission's views, and we were, to say the least, surprised. expressed that international adoption must be seen as the last resort. This was quite contrary to the way we think and work and which we believe is the correct interpretation of the Hague Convention, namely that it is in the best interests of the child to become part of a family rather than to be placed in an institution. in his home country.
Subsequently, we have encountered similar views from several sides of the EU system, including also from an English member of the European Parliament, Baroness Emma Nicholson, who has been very involved in the process of the accession negotiations with Bulgaria and (in particular) Romania. Recently, the EU Commission has responded to a question from the Danish authorities stating, inter alia, that international adoption can only come about if the child in his home country cannot be appropriately taken care of. Later in the reply, it is stated that in Romania and Bulgaria, adequate care is generally present, which is why the Hague Convention does not oblige the 2 countries to release children for international adoption. The Swedish authorities have received the reply from Brussels that no EU decision on international adoptions exists. Confused?
The picture that draws from the purely legal side of the case is a bit complicated. Simply put, the reasoning is based on an interpretation of the above two conventions and their mutual ranking. That discussion will hardly ever solve the problem.