The High Court has formally approved the adoption of a non-national teenager to the woman who had cared for the child for many years after the teen’s birth mother died.
The adoption approval was granted by Mr Justice Max Barrett who in a written judgement said while case arose from sad and tragic beginning it was “one of those life-affirming cases” which sometimes crop before the courts that suggest that goodness and happiness were still abundant in the world.
The judge said he was making the order without the child’s father having being consulted about the proposed adoption. This was because the despite extensive efforts the identity of the teen’s father remains unknown, and was therefore not possible to contact them.
The child cannot be identified for legal purposes.
The court heard that the teen, when very young, came to Ireland with the child’s non-national mother over a decade ago. However shortly after their arrival in Ireland, the minor’s mother died after giving birth to another child. Tragically, the newborn infant also died, the court also noted.
The judge said that the child the subject of the adoption application had been placed in care for many years has resided with an Irish-based foster mother. The foster mother wanted to adopt the child, and the child wanted to be adopted by said foster parent, he said.
Arising out of that mutual wish, the Adoption Authority of Ireland made a formal application to the High Court for orders that would allow the adoption to be completed. Due to the circumstances of this particular case the court heard that the authority was obliged to make efforts to establish and or contact the teen’s father.
It claimed that it had very limited information about the relationship that was in existence around the time the mother travelled to Ireland or that the father had any involvement in the child’s life prior to then. The child had no knowledge about their birth father. No man has ever come forward seeking guardianship on the basis that they are the child’s father,it was also claimed.
The court noted that the agency had made extensive efforts in the child’s native country to establish who the father was. However it was not able to accurately identify, locate or trace the father. It claimed that while it had been unable to establish who the child’s biological father was, nor contact that individual, it was in the best interests of the child that the adoption be permitted.
Given the lack of information it was impossible for it to consult with or notify the father of the proposed adoption, the agency added.
Ms Justice Barrett agreed that all reasonable efforts to identify the child’s father had been made. However he agreed with the agency that this should not be an obstacle to the adoption order being granted. The judge said, given the views of the child, he was satisfied to make an order for adoption without the natural father having to be consulted.