Abstract:
This study is a retrospective examination of the Adult Adoption Information Act 1985. The topic was chosen as a case study to demonstrate how adoption legislation had developed in New Zealand, with particular emphasis on the development of the secrecy aspect. It studies the movement for change that emerged and that resulted in the enactment of a private member's bill that gave access to identifying information from public records to adopted people and their birthparents.
It examines how change is effected in New Zealand society, specifically how the political processes dealing with change, respond to pressures for and against change on a controversial, moral or emotional issue. This is followed with an analysis of the implementation process, using a model developed by Mazmanian and Sabatier.
The main conclusions of the study are that:
1. When a controversial, moral and emotional issue emerges, the main political parties are unwilling to adopt a policy on it. It can be defined as a conscience issue on which members of parliament have a free vote, thereby avoiding possible differences or conflicts between members and within the parliamentary caucus.
2. Legislative change, by way of a private members' bill and free vote is difficult to achieve. Particularly if those in charge of the parliamentary agenda setting are opposed to what is proposed.
3. The number of applications received since the Act was implemented demonstrates that the majority of adopted people and their birthparents have a need for this information and that parliament was right to have passed the Bill.
4. The consumer groups who were involved in achieving legislative change were able to organise themselves into viable organisations with active membership, cohesion and expertise. They played a vital role during the implementation and decision making process which resulted in an effective service delivery.
5. The use of the Model in identifying crucial elements that are likely to lead to successful implementation proved to be correct. It can be useful as a guide to statute framers and implementors when framing new policies.
6. The government restrictions on access to adoption information is not essential and optional rather than compulsory service would meet the need.
