Tuesday, February 28, 2012



This writer has been moved to make this contribution to the Inquiry because ofthe plethora of media reports on certain practices allegedly carried out by governments and staff of hospitals and institutions relating to the adoption of babies some fifty to sixty years ago.

As a former trainee nurse and midwife during the early part ofthat period. I feel it incumbent upon me to correct some ofthe misconceptions which have arisen and to take issue with the many gross misstatements of fact which seem to be accepted by the Committee as absolute truths.

One such is that these natural mothers were 'forced' into placing their children for adoption. What exactly is meant by the term 'forced? From my experience, nothing could be further from the truth.
Yes, there was pressure, mainly from parents or other family members of the pregnant woman but I certainly did not see any evidence ofa mother being physically forced into giving up her child as is alleged so emotively by some ofthe witnesses. There was no gun held at their heads or threats of violence. Rather the opposite.

Many of the mothers with whom I came into contact could not wait to have the whole "experience" over and banished from their mind. At the time, many pretended their time in hospital did not happen, and that it was all a bad dream. I remember vividly one young girl who had come from interstate and spent some time in the hospital before delivery. Many months after the birth, I saw her standing at a bus stop. Pleased to see her I approached to inquire after her health and wellbeing but, on recognising me, she abruptly turned on her heel and walked away. 1 was rather disappointed as we had become quite friendly but then I realised that I was part of her past and she did not want to be reminded of that. I don't doubt there were mothers who wanted to keep their babies but no-one ever expressed so to me.

What I take issue with is the all embracing criticism and vindictiveness of most of tbe witnesses to the Inquiry against all and sundry involved in the adoption process. This presents a serious denial of natural justice towards all those doctors and nurses and ancillary staff who tried their very best to make the experience of these mothers so much less traumatic than it would otherwise have been.
As one doctor told me, "one cannot do any better than one's best..... Obviously, that best was not good enough.

The hospital and ancillary staff of all these institutions could not have been the ogres the witnesses would have us believe. By the law of averages, there must have been some good people. From my own personal observations I challenge any suggestion that my fonner colleagues treated these
mothers other than with the utmost professionalism and respect.

We all know that distance often lends enchantment to happy places and events. Conversely, memory can magnify and grossly distort real or imaginary bad experiences to the extent that it is difficult to separate fact from fiction. Suffice it to say that expressions such as 'betrayal', 'forcibly removed', 'unjustly abused', 'manipulation',,...to satisfythe ideals of others','abduction','denial of rights', 'persecuted', 'nefarious' and more, with allegations of being 'shackled to a bed',' illegal procedures and crimes' and so on makes one wonder what is fact or fiction. Some of these women seem to be endowed with the most vivid and most lurid of imaginations.

Just exactly how and where was the witness concerned 'shackled to a bed'? In prison somewhere?
Was the shackling carried out with chains, handcuffs, or other heinous instrument of torture? Or was she simply restrained from hurting herself and her baby by having a sheet wrapped tightly around her or restrained with bandages applied to her wrists? Some people have a very low pain
threshold and labour pains can be extremely severe. Besides, it must be remember that many of these mothers were very young, away from home and family and no doubt terrified, not only of being in a strange hospital or other institution but of the thought of giving birth itself. It was a time period of unsophisticates.

Another witness complains of being given medication to dry up her milk. Did she want to end up with engorged breasts with possible abscesses on her nipples? If she was not feeding her baby, how else was she to stop lactating? She could have taken the natural route over many painful
days but it is manifestly obvious that the nursing staff meant to help her, not hinder her.

A further witness alleges she was drugged after the birth. Please! Most probably she was suffering the after affects of normal pain killers which had been given her during labour She would have been given a drug to assist in expelling the placenta but in all, her "drugged" state could simply be reaction to the traumatic events pre and post delivery. Birth experiences are individualistic. One size does not fit all. There was no sinister conspiracy to cause her any harm of that I am sure. If she was given a sedative after birth, she probably needed it.

The practice of holding up a sheet in front of the mother or having a pillow placed on her stomach to prevent her from seeing the child was not an act of cruelty as has been portrayed but an act of kindness. The prevailing theory propagated at the time was that the less the mother saw or heard or had anything to do with her baby after birth the trauma of giving it up at a later date would be considerably reduced. It was an act of compassion. Misplaced, perhaps, but compassion none the less. Of course, this theory has now been debunked but, as with many other things, society and the medical profession did not have the knowledge and wisdom of foresight.

As to these alleged "illegal procedures and crimes", have they been particularised? If not why not? Surely, those accused have a right to state their cases and defend their actions if need be.

It may be very difficult for younger people to grasp the fact that fifty plus years ago there was a very strict moral code with very few areas of grey, unlike today's moral vacuum or liberalism (whichever one prefers) where children are having children with no restraint, ably assisted by
taxpayer funded government largesse including pensions, baby bonuses, housing, educational assistance and more. A Child Support Agency had not yet morphed into anyone's _ consciousness while "counselling" as a profession was virtually unknown. Today counsellors are, like
lemmings, everywhere!

It was a world beyond all imaginings and the mothers, the subject of this Inquiry, know that it was.
To say so is not the "propaganda" of the "pro-adoption" advocates or "the continued trite and offending excuses for actions of immeasurable inhumanity towards us mothers" as described by one witness. They are statements of fact. The seemingly cruel, raw fact of life as it was over a
half century ago. And, as mentioned supra, these mothers were and are well aware of this.

In my submission, the Committee should endeavour to ensure that this Inquiry does not degenerate into a witch hunt with these mothers finding in it a venue for wallowing in their own misery and guilt whilst at the same time blaming everyone else but themselves for their sorry situation. They opened their legs to their then boyfriends or lovers and, whether intended of not, a child was conceived. Some responsibility must be accepted by these mothers for what followed.

This is part of the submission 413. The writer shows that these practices did happen.
It shows the same attitude now as we faced 50 years age.
It shows drugs were given.Everything the writer denys she shows "happened."
When these mothers were in the delivery room to give birth, they were just young mothers. There was no adoption in place at that time. Did married mothers suffer the same treatment?
When medication was given to "dry up her Milk", she was still the mother of a new born and her baby was adoption free. What right was the mother given? Was she given her baby to feed ? We think not!
The writer goes on to write about the fathers.
Many mothers supplied fathers names and addresses but the social worker for Child Safety did not put this information on the original birth certificates. This ensured that the Social worker did not have to gain consent from the father.
This submission is a good example of what we faced then. No rights, No compassion. The delivery room should have been adoption free and all staff there should have shown compassion and help.
Even though there was a "strict moral code" it did not make these practices legal!

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Four Corners Monday 27th February 2012 at 8 30pm.

Four Corners will be showing more on Forced Adoption Polices and Practices in Australia.

Lateline program Friday 24/02/2012.Mothers Want Apology Over Forced Adoption

Last night Friday 24th Feb 2012, Latelines program showed interview about forced adoption in Australia.
You can watch this by looking at the Lateline site.
It told of the Commonwealth Contribution too Former Forced Adoption Policies and Practices.
Our thanks to Lateline for bringing this to the public.

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Reply from Hon Phil Reeves, Minister for Child Safety to our letter in regards to Mothers obtaining an Original Birth Certificates at the time their babies were born, and before adoption order was in place.

Hon Phil Reeves
Member for Mansfield.
Minister for Child Safety and Minister for Sport.

20 FEB 2012

Adoption Loss Adult Support Australia Inc

Thank you for your letter of 30 January 2012 concerning the effect that the provisions of the now repealed Adoption of Children Act 1964 had on the issuing of original birth certificates.

There were no provisions contained in the repealed Act preventing a child's birth parents from applying for and purchasing a copy of their child's birth certificate before an adoption order was made. As you would be aware, in past decades many children were adopted approximately 10 days after their parents consented to the child's adoption. It appears that birth parents may not have been informed that they were entitled to apply for a copy of their child's birth certificate prior to the child being adopted and that consideration may not have been given as to whether a child's birth parents may wish to apply for their child's birth certificate after consenting to the adoption and prior to the child being adopted. Although this appears to be the case, I cannot confirm what occurred as only minimal records about adoption practices in Queensland in past decades remain.

I am able to advise that under the repealed Adoption of Children Act 1964, the Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages was provided with information about all adoption orders made in Queensland and were required to keep an Adopted Child Register. If the adopted child was born in Queensland, the Registry was required to seal the child's original birth certificate when advised of the adoption. After sealing the original certificate, the Registry was required to issue an amended birth certificate for the child including the child's adoptive name and listing the adoptive parents as the child's parents. After an adoption order was made, the child's original birth certificate remained sealed, thereby preventing any person, including the child's birth parents, from being able to access the certificate without authorisation from the Chief Executive (after the adopted person reached 18 years of age) or an order of the Supreme Court in limited circumstances.

I appreciate how important it is for birth parents who have consented to their child being adopted in Queensland, to be able to have a copy of their child's original birth certificate to document their relationship with the child and the child's birth.

This issue was considered when developing the Adoption Act 2009, which commenced on 1 February 2010 in Queensland and replaced the repealed Adoption of Children Act 1964. Under the current Act, a birth parent continues to be able to apply for and purchase a copy of his or her child's original birth certificate from the Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages before an adoption order is made. In addition, under the Act, birth parents are now entitled to obtain a copy of their child's original birth certificate at any time after an adoption order is made. If a birth parent makes a request to Adoption Services Queensland for authorisation to obtain a copy of his or her child's original birth certificate, Adoption Services Queensland must provide the parent with the authorisation. The birth parent may then present the authorisation to the Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages and apply for and purchase a copy of the child's original birth certificate. Upon receipt of an authorisation and application, the Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages must provide the birth parent with a copy of the child's original birth certificate.

Another provision within the Adoption Act 2009 now enables a birth parent and a child's adoptive parents, where both parties agree, to receive identifying information about each other and authorisation to obtain a copy of the child's amended or original birth certificate, as applicable, before the child is 18 years of age. Once an adopted child reaches 18 years of age, Adoption Services Queensland is able to authorise the Registry to provide a birth parent with his or her child's amended birth certificate, without first requiring permission from the adoptive parents.

I would also like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the support you and members of Adoption Loss Adult Support Australia Inc provide to people affected by adoption and to thank you and your members for your input into the development of the Adoption Act 2009.

If you require any further information or assistance in relation to this matter, please contact Ms Kathryn Scott, Acting Manager, Quality Care Programs, Child Protection Development, Communities, Child Safety, Youth and Families, Department of Communities on
3247 3693.

I trust this information is of assistance.

Yours sincerely

Phil Reeves MP
Minister for Child Safety
and Minister for Sport
Member for Mansfield
111 George Street Brisbane
GPO Box 806 Brisbane Queensland 4001 Australia
Telephone +61 7 3224 7477
Facsimile +61 7 3210 2190
Email childsafety@minsterial.qld.gov.au
Website www.childsafety.qld.gov.au

Wednesday, February 22, 2012


On this form,one question for females was,"how many children did you give birth to?"
Are they our children or not?


Where adoption is concerned, it is not!

Australia has Two Birth Certificates for children who have been adopted.

The first Birth Certificate has a true record of a baby's birth and parent/parents but is marked,"NOT TO BE USED FOR OFFICIAL PURPOSES".
The second Birth Registered Certificate holds a record of the new parents and that is accepted as the "OFFICIAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE".
Both of these certificates are registered at Birth, Deaths and marriages offices.

Therefore the childs identity has been forever changed and the mother who gave birth to this child has been eliminated.


The Australian Government further adds to this by;
on a death Certificate of the mother, (her child who has gone to adoption)is not recognised as being, "born to her".

On a Death Certificate of the child, the new parents names are listed.

This ensues that for all future generations of both mother and child, their genetic link/ genetic blood line to their family of original is permanently severed.

The Australian Government has altered the natural history of its people,of its country!

The Geneva Convention of human rights of a child states, " The child shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have the right from birth to a name, the right to acquire a nationality and, as far as possible, the right to know and be cared for by his or her parents."

One of our members often says,,"The truth becomes the lie and the lie becomes the truth".
She should know as she has lived it every day of her life.

A better solution to adoption would be Permanent Guardianship.

The child would not have to lose his/her heritage and infertile couples would have a child.

Monday, February 20, 2012

Updated Link for Senate Inquiry Submissions Page

Please click here:

Original Birth Certificates of babies who were later to be adopted.

ALAS Australia Inc asked for the following information.

ALAS is writing to you to obtain conformation on the adoption Act of 1964 in regards to Original Birth Certificates of babies who were later adopted.

We understand that with issuing a second birth certificate, and with the secrecy placed around adoption, that once consent forms were signed and adoption orders made, the privacy law came into place.

However, when our babies were born to us, there was no consent form signed or adoption order in place.
The original Birth Certificate should have been given to the mother as; both mother and baby were free from any form of adoption at that time, (at their birth.)

There was no identifying information about adoptive parents on the original Birth Certificate; in fact there was no involvement at all, as there was no court order in place.

Therefore, we would like to know the reason why a new mother was denied her original Birth certificate for her new born baby. We know the entry of birth happened the next day after the birth while mother was still the legal guardian of her baby.

Where in the law does it state that we were not entitled to have our baby’s legal Birth Certificate from the time of their birth to when the court order came into place? They were OUR BABIES!

Our answer from Brisbane Births, Deaths and Marriages;
Up until the time B/D/M received a copy of the adoption order,THERE WAS NO REASON MOTHERS COULD NOT HAVE THEIR BABIES BIRTH CERTIFICATES.
The reason we did not get them?

Saturday, February 18, 2012

35,766 Queensland adoptions from 1945 to1980.

With the National Principals for overseas adoptions listed on our previous post, we ask,"were there any National Principals in place to protect Australian mothers?"
"Did Australian Mothers not matter?"

1945-1946 Number of adoptions; 852
1946-1947 Number of adoptions; 766
1947-1948 Number of adoptions; 768
1948-1949 Number of adoptions; 879
1949-1950 Number of adoptions; 786
1950-1951 Number of adoptions; 851
1951-1952 Number of adoptions; 860
1952-1953 Number of adoptions; 819
1953-1954 Number of adoptions; 756
1954-1955 Number of adoptions; 662
1955-1956 Number of adoptions; 783
1956-1957 Number of adoptions; 765
1957-1958 Number of adoptions; 771
1958-1959 Number of adoptions; 852
1959-1960 Number of adoptions; 865
1960-1961 Number of adoptions; 814
1961-1962 Number of adoptions; 872
1962-1963 Number of adoptions; 927
1963-1964 Number of adoptions; 1084
1964-1965 Number of adoptions; 1266
1965-1966 Number of adoptions; 1398
1966-1967 Number of adoptions; 1386
1967-1968 Number of adoptions; 1371
1968-1969 Number of adoptions; 1448
1969-1970 Number of adoptions; 1500
1970-1971 Number of adoptions; 1562
1971-1972 Number of adoptions; 1774
1972-1973 Number of adoptions; 1678
1973-1974 Number of adoptions; 1458
1974-1975 Number of adoptions; 1394
1975-1976 Number of adoptions; 1112
1976-1977 Number of adoptions; 1014
1977-1978 Number of adoptions; 660
1978-1979 Number of adoptions; 563
1979-1980 Number of adoptions; 450
Total adoptions;35,766

This research is from Annual report of the Director Dept of Children's Services by J Clarke who has make every effort to provide quality information.

ALAS asks, "Why has the number of adoptions been shown in a financial year?"

Friday, February 17, 2012

Closing date for inquiry 29th February 2012

Submissions Received for the Senate Inquiry into Commonwealth Contribution to Former Forced Adoption Policies and Practices.
There are now 410 submissions on line.
If you would like to read the submissions and answers to the Senators questions for the Senate Inquiry, please click here:

National Principals in Adoption


[Amended to incorporate obligations that arise out of Australia s compliance with the United Nations
Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Hague Convention on the Protection of. Children and Cooperation
in Respect of Intercountry Adoption.]


The interest of the child is the paramount consideration and the child’s fundamental rights are to be

The age appropriate views or consent of the child are to be sought and freely given to the adoption
Adoption is a service for children not for adults wishing to acquire the care of a child.
Counselling and support services should be available to children and their family.
Adoption is only one of a range of substitute care services available to families.
Within legal parameters as set down in legislation and international treaties, a flexible approach
should be taken regarding any negotiated arrangements supporting an adoption.
Adoption arrangements should be subject to a consistent criterion.

Adoption placements are valued as an important resource in providing permanent family care for
(some) children.
Children who cannot be brought up within their birth family, are entitled to grow up in a permanent,
secure and loving, family environment.
A child has the right to be brought up within their birth family, wherever possible.
A child has the right to be considered for placement within the extended family prior to placement
outside its family.
A birth Family has the right to community and government support to allow the child to be
maintained within the family.
The adopted person/birth family, regardless of age, has the right to independent representation
throughout the adoption process.
The child should preferably be placed in a culturally/ethnically appropriate placement. Adoption is
a process regulated by Australian, State or Territory legislation and International treaties.
Adoption is a process regulated by Australian, State or Territory legislation and international

The adopted person’s legal status must be enshrined in legislation.
Persons involved in the adoption process should not be discriminated against or disadvantaged by
Australian, State or Territory legislative differences.
The meaning, effect and recognition of adoption orders should be the same regardless of
State/Territory boundaries.
Authorities should provide equitable and accessible services to all parties of adoption on an
individual basis.
State/Territory) Central Authorities (or accredited bodies) have responsibility for the matching of
children with adoptive parents

Processing of applications reflect and notification of allocations and the 'forwarding of confidential
information will be undertaken by State/Territory Central Authorities (or accredited bodies).

Adoption arrangements by consenting parties, presented to "courts" should be consistent with the
adoption principles.
Birth parents have the right to express their wishes and be involved in the planning for the
placement of their child.
Birth parents have the right to be kept informed of the progress of their child following placement
with adoptive parents. and to have a right of access to the child if this has been agreed to.
Adoptive parents must be assessed and approved through an approved process according to a
consistent criteria as being suitable to adopt.
26. Adoptive parents and children have a right to legal security.
27 Accredited bodies have a role in supporting and educating adoptive applicants.


Adoption is one of a range of alternatives of legally securing a child's place in the family. An
adoption order should therefore, only be granted if it is considered to be the best option in the
interests of each particular child.
Adoption should not be considered for children in step-families or living with relatives, unless it
can be demonstrated that a lesser order would not serve the needs of the child.
The availability of orders providing permanent alternative care through the Family Court is
recognised and should be subject to the same principles as apply to adoption orders. Both orders
involve the transfer of care and responsibility of children to a third party.
All persons who are adopted have a right to know they are adopted.
Adult adopted people have a right to identifying information about their biological parents.
A birth parent as a right to information about his or her child.
A birth parent has a right to identifying information on his or her child once the child has reached
legal adulthood under Adoption legislation.
Adopted people and birth parents have the right to state that they do not wish contact and for that
wish to be conveyed to the other party.
Appropriate information and counselling should be available to all parties to an adoption.
Open adoption is an adoption arrangement where ongoing contact between the birth parent(s) and their
child occurs following adoption proceedings and is acknowledged in the adoption order.

Openness and honesty in family relationships should be encouraged in all adoptions.
Openness in adoption arrangements should be achieved as far as is possible with a minimum of
welfare or state intervention and should not undermine the parental authority of adoptive parents.
Notwithstanding this, professional support and advice should be readily available to families
involved in open adoption arrangements.
Birth parents if expressing a desire to do so should be involved in the selection of approved
adoptive parents for their child (ren) having regard to the paramount consideration of the needs of
the child(ren).


Prior to the adoption of a child, the informed consent of each person who is legally the parent of
that child should be sought to the adoption.
Prior to taking consent to an adoption the witness should have responsibility to ensure that the birth
parent has been informed about the implications of adoption and about all the alternatives available
to him or her.
Information about the implications of signing consent to an adoption and explaining the time period
and process for revolving consent should be given to relinquishing parents in writing prior to their
signing consents.
No consent to an adoption should be taken prior to the birth of the child concerned nor for a
specified period after the birth.
Counselling/support should be available to birth parents and consenting children throughout the
period of revocation.
Birth parents should be permitted reasonable access to their children during the revocation period.
Birth parents should be allowed to revoke the adoption consent without pressure at any time during
the revocation period and have the child returned to their car as soon as is possible.
Children should not be placed with prospective adoptive parents until after the revocation period
has expired.
Birth parents should be given as much information as possible about the prospective adoptive
parents and be allowed to participate to the greatest extent as is reasonably practical in the selection
of approved adoptive parents for their child having regard to the paramount consideration of the
needs of the child(ren).
Accredited bodies should ensure that appropriate post adoption counselling and support services are
available to relinquishing parents.
1 The maximum age difference between the oldest of the applicants and the first child placed in
the family should be 40 years.

In subsequent placements or where there is already a child in the family the maximum age
difference between the eldest of the applicants and the child should be 45 years.
The age criteria should apply to Australian born and intercountry adoptions.

Single applicants should be permitted to apply to adopt a child.
Couples in established defacto relationships be afforded the same status by agencies as
married couples and subject to the same assessment of stability.
Applicants for adoption must meet basic health requirements which will not impede their
ability to care for the child. The life expectancy of the parents and their health should be such
that they can parent the child and provide quality care until the child attains independence.
2. The assessment of health should occur prior to any general assessment of suitability as
adoptive parents.
Applicants for adoption should be excluded if they have an established record of violent
offences abuse of children or have had a child removed from their care under child protection
1. Parties in the adoption process should have appropriate review and appeal mechanisms
available to them.
Preparation of applicants prior to adoption by way of information giving and training is a
crucial and integral part of the adoption process, which assists in self-selection, sustaining
placements and reducing disruption of placements.
Central Authorities should co-operate in the exchange of literature on current state
programmes for the continual improvement of their adoption and permanent care

Follow up and post placement support are a crucial and integral part of the adoption process.

No child should be disadvantaged in securing a permanent family placement because of the lack of
resources to support such a placement.
Children with special needs have the same right as any other child to a secure a permanent family
All adoption arrangements in Australia should be made through Central Authorities or approved
accredited bodies and in accordance with the relevant legislation.
All children have a right to independent counselling/representation to ensure that they understand
the implications of an adoption that their wishes are being heard and to protect their fundamental
rights in the adoption process.
Applicants for adoption should be treated in a fair and equitable manner when transferring their
application between states/territories and not be unfairly advantaged or disadvantaged by such a
State and territory welfare agencies should exercise the option to dispense with parental consent
only when it has been considered along with other options and considered to be in the best interests
of the child.
Custody/guardianship orders through the Family Court that do not interfere with the biological
relationship to birth parents (and siblings) should generally be sought.
Adoption is not considered to be in the best interests of, or appropriate for children in stepfamilies
or living with relatives unless it can be clearly demonstrated that a guardianship order would not
serve their needs.
Taken from Senate Inquiry.

Friday, February 3, 2012

OUR NEXT MEETING 11th February 2012

Our next meeting will be at Four Mile Creek Hotel Gympie Road, Strathine.

(Used to be Country Club, Opp Westfield shopping centre.)

Time; 11 30am onwards.
Please contact; Trish Mob 0417 077 159 ASAP.
We need to know numbers for Bookings.

$10 menu available.

All Welcome.