Birth mothers and children find government guidance insufficient

The cabinet apologized for forced adoption practices, but is undermining that gesture with the follow-up steps it is announcing, say the affected parties.

Representatives of so-called birth mothers and their children have severely criticized the remedial measures offered to them by the government. In particular, the continued limited access to their own files is leading to dismayed reactions among those involved.

Two weeks ago, the Dutch government apologized for some 14,000 cases in which mostly young, unmarried mothers were pressured to give up their babies immediately after birth. The family often played a role in this, as did the church, but the government as well. 'We did not listen to the mothers and never intervened,' said State Secretary Claudia van Bruggen at the time on behalf of the government.

Those apologies meant a great deal to those affected, says Frans Haven of the Verleden in Zicht foundation, which advocates for the interests of relinquished children. But the concrete plans subsequently presented by the cabinet caused a storm of indignation among his constituency. The biggest sticking point is that access to their own files remains limited. The cabinet says it wants to protect the interests of other people who appear in those files.

This file is our only lifeline.

“So with that, you are saying that their interests outweigh ours,” Haven responds. For for his constituents, that access is of the utmost importance. “If we want to know anything at all about our ancestry, we have no family members to ask. This file is our only anchor. We need all the information contained in it.”

The government was aware of that position. Together with representatives of birth mothers and with Bureau Clara Wichmann, Verleden in Zicht has explained this often enough. It is number 2 on their list of demands , directly below apologies. Yet, in the parliamentary letter regarding the remedial measures, it appears under the heading 'Needs that are not (fully) met'. For Haven, this came as a surprise: “It is strange that you offer apologies, but regarding the things that are most important to those people, you immediately say: 'we are not going to do that!'”

Avoid empty excuses

The three organizations call on the government to reconsider its position. “The measures fall short and undermine the credibility of the apologies,” they write. Linde Bryk, Head of Strategic Litigation at Bureau Clara Wichmann, points to Ireland and Australia, among others, where extensive reparations were implemented, and in close consultation with the affected parties. She believes that the latter was not the case in the talks in the Netherlands. “They are still talking about these people, not with them.”

The Netherlands should follow such examples, the joint organizations state: “If the state continues on the current course, the apologies for the historical injustice inflicted will continue to feel empty and be undermined.”

Not legally possible

In a response, the Ministry of Justice and Security states that 'not all wishes of those affected are legally possible'. “Therefore, a package of measures has been chosen that can contribute to recognition, recovery, and support for the largest possible group. The measures focus, among other things, on support with access to files, adding letters from those affected to files, identity restoration, safeguarding stories for the future, and searching for information on ancestry.

With the apology, the Cabinet has taken responsibility for the government's role in the past regarding domestic relinquishment and adoption. With this package of measures, we are giving concrete follow-up to this.