MSPs told adoption laws fall foul of European Convention on Human Rights

During his opening remarks, Nathan Sparling said that the current law that prohibits people over the age of 18 from being adopted is at odds with human rights protections afforded in the European Convention of Human Rights.

He said: “Finding out that I was not able to be adopted because I’d reached an arbitrary age set by the state left me feeling as though my special moment of asking my father to adopt me was stolen from me.

“Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights provides that everyone has the right to respect for their private and family life, and that there shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society for the protection of health or morals.”

He said it must be considered whether the law interfered with “my right to respect for family life”.

“I would argue that the mutual enjoyment by parent and child of each other’s company, which includes a sense of belonging to one another, constitutes a fundamental element of family life and that the law as it currently stands interferes inappropriately and may hinder this enjoyment - lacking the sense of belonging to a family member.

“There are also three other arguments to consider. Is the interference on this human right in accordance with the law? When it comes to people over the age of 18 who want to be adopted, I believe the current legislation held in the Children and Adoption Act is simply arbitrary and prejudicial; therefore cannot be in accordance with the law.”

His second question was: does the interference pursue a legitimate aim?

He said: “What I believe lawmakers have to consider is; what is the purpose of blocking people over the age of 18 from being adopted. I would argue that in an ever-changing world, growing and blended families, that there is no legitimate aim for this restriction.

“Lastly; were the measures taken necessary in a democratic society? Simply put - I don’t believe restricting adoption rights in this was is necessary, and therefore there is a need for legislative amendments.

“In looking at these areas; it can simply be said that for people over the age of 18, whether they be a step-child in a blended family or a care-experienced young person who wants to be adopted by a foster family, the law as it stands is not human rights compliant.”