The deep and ongoing harm to adopted people from adoption and adoption practices has never been investigated or examined on a national scale in Australia.

The 2011-2012 Senate Inquiry into Forced Adoption was an inquiry into removal and trafficking practices only.

There has been no inquiry into adoption itself. The only formally recognised problem with adoption is that mothers were forced.

So, to get any services or to try to have issues addressed, adoptees generally have had no choice but to engage under the “Forced Adoption” umbrella.

This negates and invalidates the adoptee experience of adoption itself.

Adoption is an inherently flawed institution, and adoptees have been – and still are – subjected to systemic, draconian and damaging practices and policies in an anachronistic legal framework that violates their fundamental human rights.

Since the Federal Apology in 2013 (based on the Report of the Senate Inquiry into the Commonwealth Contribution to Former Forced Adoption Policies and Practices), there has been a failure to follow that apology up with genuine, concrete action.

Most of the undertakings made in the 2013 Apology regarding implementation of the 2012 Senate Inquiry Recommendations have not been carried out.

As it was only an inquiry, not a Royal Commission, there is no power besides “good faith” to get the government to do the right thing.

But good faith hasn’t worked…

All we see is smoke and mirrors!

The adoption legislation that adoptees are bound by today was founded on – and still embodies – the harmful practices of the past.

This affects all adoptees who are adopted under Australian adoption legislation, including intercountry adoptees.

What is the difference between an Inquiry and a Royal Commission?

Inquiry:

• Findings are advisory only.
• The government can easily ignore the findings (as we have experienced).

Royal Commission:

• Can compel accountability.
• Carries significant weight in driving law reform and policy change.
• Is a lot harder to ignore.

Other Royal Commissions:

The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse (2013-2017) led to significant legislative and policy changes.

The Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability (2019-2023) exposed systemic failures and paved the way for reforms.

What would a Royal Commission into Adoption do?

A Royal Commission into Adoption would bring similar accountability to recommendations, and ensure that the voices of Adoptees are heard at a national level.

The Terms of Reference for a Royal Commission:

• must be co-designed with lived and living experience stakeholders;
• investigate both systemic failures in removal and post-adoption practices, and
• the long-term outcomes of adoption for adopted people.

The Terms of Reference for a Royal Commission should include investigation into:

• The long-term effects of adoption on adoptees and also intergenerationally:
  – loss of identity,
  – loss of culture,
  – medical history gaps,
  – effects on life expectancy,
  – living with genealogical bewilderment.
• Ongoing barriers:
  – legal,
  – bureaucratic,
  – financial.
• Access to adoption records and correction of birth and death certificates.
• Systemic historical and current pre- and post-adoption practices.
• Jurisdictional inconsistencies in adoption laws and practices, and their effects.
• Adoption legislation compatibility with Australia’s undertakings on human rights.
• Preservation of adoption history.
• Accountability of institutions and state/territory governments for past and current practices and requirements for legislative change and reparation.

A Royal Commission should be informed by, and build on, the submissions and findings of all previous inquiries.

What would a Royal Commission into Adoption provide?

A full, transparent investigation into past and present adoption practices.

Justice – acknowledgement of harm and reparation.

The possibility of concrete action – before more survivors pass away!