India has a non-existing social security system. In the UK, state interference in family matters was highlighted when ‘loving grandparents’ were not given rights to their grandchildren because they were considered too old at 46 and 59 years respectively.
Recently, we have an unethical 70 year old couple who were allowed IVF treatment producing a baby girl in India. Such decisions have to be cleared and audited by a Government ethical committee. We need clear guidelines for IVF in India, since population growth is a constraint, and IVF (in vitro fertilization) is only a luxury.
India has 11 million orphans of which only 4000 are adopted every year. We have not reached the comparable situation as UK.
‘They say we’re too old to care for our grandchildren’: Social workers hand brother and sister to gay men for adoption
28th January 2009
Two young children are to be adopted by a gay couple, despite the protests of their grandparents.
The devastated grandparents were told they would never see the youngsters again unless they dropped their opposition.
The couple, who cannot be named, wanted to give the five-year-old boy and his four-year-old sister a loving home themselves. But they were ruled to be too old – at 46 and 59.
For two years they fought for their rights to care for the children, whose 26-year- old mother is a recovering heroin addict.
They agreed to an adoption only after they faced being financially crippled by legal bills.
The final blow came when they were told the children were going to a gay household, even though several heterosexual couples wanted them.
When the grandfather protested, he was told: ‘You can either accept it, and there’s a chance you’ll see the children twice a year, or you can take that stance and never see them again.’
The man said last night: ‘It breaks my heart to think that our grandchildren are being forced to grow up in an environment without a mother figure. We are not prejudiced, but I defy anyone to explain to us how this can be in their best interests.’
Social workers themselves have admitted that the little girl is ‘more wary’ of men than women.
The case, in Edinburgh, raises worrying issues about state interference in family life.
It will also fuel concern over the practice of gay adoption, which has been promoted by Left-wing ministers and council bosses.
Some local authorities forbid adoption by smokers and obese people but actively support gay fostering and adoption – even though research shows overwhelmingly that children are best brought up by a mother and father.
The grandparents first stepped in because the children’s mother was unable to look after them.
But council social workers became worried that the grandparents’ ages and health problems meant they would also be unable to care for the children properly.
The 59-year-old grandfather, a farm worker, has angina while his wife is receiving medication for diabetes.
The children were taken into foster care during the two years of court hearings.
When the grandparents eventually conceded defeat, they were assured by social workers that they would still have regular contact with them.
The fostering arrangement worked well, but the council decided that the children should be adopted, to give them a permanent home.
The grandparents agreed – as long as they could be assured that the adoptive parents would be a loving mother and father.
The couple were then told an adoption had been arranged – but the grandfather ‘hit the roof’ when he discovered that the adoptive parents were two gay men.
Social workers dealing with the case admitted that heterosexual couples who were approved as adoptive parents had also been keen to adopt the children.
The decision was taken even though a confidential social work report – now part of the court records held by the grandparents – contained that the little girl is generally not as happy around men.
The report says she ‘has tended to be more wary of males in general.’
Her grandparents insist they are not homophobic.
But they reject the view of social workers that the decision to allow the gay couple to adopt the children was made ‘in accordance with who can best meet their needs.’
When they made their opposition clear, however, the couple were told that social workers would ‘certainly look’ at allowing them access to the children ‘when you are able to come back with an open mind on the issues’.
The grandfather was told by a social worker: ‘If you couldn’t support the children [in the gay adoption], if you were having contact and couldn’t support the children, and were showing negative feelings, it wouldn’t be in their best interests for contact to take place.’
He said last night: ‘The ideal for any child is to have a loving father and a loving mother in their lives.
‘But in our society the mother is generally the cornerstone of the family and the most important person for a young child.’
His wife added: ‘It’s so important for children to fit in, and I feel our grandchildren will be marked out from the start when they draw pictures of their two dads.’
The last time the couple saw their grandchildren was shortly after the agreement for them to be adopted but before the decision to place them with a gay couple.
They took dozens of photographs and tried, for the sake of the youngsters, not to break down.
‘Granny, I’m not going to see you for a very long time,’ said the five-year-old boy. ‘Maybe when I’m in Primary Seven I’ll be able to see you.’
‘We’ll try our very hardest to see you soon,’ said his grandmother, choking back tears.
The boy told his grandfather: ‘Grandad, if you want to see me you will have to pick me up because I will be a very long way away.’
Then he added innocently: ‘We are getting a new mummy and daddy.’
A spokesman for the Roman Catholic church condemned the council’s decision last night, warning that the children’s welfare could be jeopardised.
Peter Kearney said: ‘This is a devastating decision which will have a serious impact on the welfare of the children involved.
‘There is an overwhelming body of evidence showing that same-sex relationships are inherently unstable and reduce the life expectancy of those involved.
‘With this in mind, the social work department has deliberately ignored evidence which undermines their decision and opted for politically correct posturing rather than providing stability and protection.
‘It is impossible to see how this decision is in the best interests of the children.’
The City of Edinburgh Council said last night that it could not comment on individual cases.
Adoption by gay couples in Scotland was approved by MSPs in 2006 – despite an official consultation process which showed that nearly 90 per cent of people opposed it.