Information on adoption

Press, 25 October 1984, Page 20

Information on adoption

Sir,—l read with interest Mrs M. Quin’s letter of October 13.1 am a birth parent and wonder why it is so hard to get in contact with the “Spokesperson, Birth Parents Anonymous.” I have never seen any advertisements or been contacted by the spokesperson. Who elected Mrs Quin to speak on behalf of birth parents? I think it would be easier to write a letter to the Social Welfare Department or to my member of Parliament and state my views on the Adult Adoption Bill than to contact Mrs Quin, as she seems to be speaking on my behalf without getting my views. I think it would be wise if Mrs Quin attended a birth parents’ meeting and made herself known to a few of us. — Yours, etc., W. JEMMETT. October 15, 1984.

[Mrs Margaret M. Quin, spokesperson, Birth Parents Anonymous, comments: “I voice the concerns of birth parents who, for varying and personal reasons, relinquished their rights to a child and have the integrity to honour that commitment. Part of the contract was a guarantee of permanent confidentiality for all concerned. These birth parents are unanimous in their insistence that what the law promised (permanently-sealed records) the law must deliver. Writing to a member of Parliament or the Social Welfare Department — let- alone appearing personally before a select committee — exposes them as parents of illegitimate children, something they were assured would never need to be revealed in the future. As well as their fundamental right to individual privacy, this bill effectively removes their freedom of speech. The only Parliamentarians sensitive to suffering women’s needs are Sir Robert Muldoon and Mr Jim McLay, both of whom are on record as being prepared to accept anonymous letters from affected citizens. The man behind the bill, Jonathan Hunt, stated publicly that unsigned letters are destroyed unread. No-one “elected” me to fight to maintain the integrity of statute law on behalf of those who relied on its unequivocal provisions. My stand has resulted in hundreds of desperate birth parents from all over the country begging me to continue my fight for justice. They traced me the same way dissident groups hunt down people who prefer privacy to doorstep confrontation — through telephone directories and electoral rolls. Birth parents who choose to make knoin intimate facts about themselsß are free to do so. They are not ’entitled in a democracy to

force others with similar backgrounds into the same situation. I shall not be making myself known to what W. Jemmett so accurately describes as “a few of us.” I am too busy representing the interests of the demonstrable majority of birth parents who clearly have not requested a retrospective change in the law.”]