The Adoption of SG (anonymised)

[2022] NSWSC 445

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

The Adoption of SG (anonymised) [2022] NSWSC 445

Hearing dates:

On the papers

Date of orders:

11 April 2022

Decision date:

12 April 2022

Jurisdiction:

Equity - Adoptions List

Before:

Sackar J

Decision:

Orders made

Catchwords:

FAMILY LAW — Children — Adoption — Whether adoption clearly preferable and in the best interests of the child — Whether the consent of the birth parents ought to be dispensed with — Change of name — Registration of adoption plans

Legislation Cited:

Adoption Act 2000 (NSW)

Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 (NSW)

Category:

Principal judgment

Parties:

Secretary, Department of Communities and Justice by his delegate, Principal Officer, Barnardos Australia (plaintiff)

Representation:

Counsel:

Solicitors:
Adoptions Barnardos Australia (plaintiff)

File Number(s):

2022/00051073

Publication restriction:

Nothing which would identify the parties.

Judgment

1. This application relates to the adoption of SG born in April 2018.

2. SG has lived with the proposed adoptive parents continuously since 26 June 2020. At the time of the placement SG was 2 years and 2 months old. In May 2020 the Children’s Court at Port Kembla made final orders providing for SG to be placed under the parental responsibility of the Minister for Families, Communities and Disability Services until she obtains 18 years pursuant to the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 (NSW).

3. Orders are sought dispensing with the consent of the child’s birth parents an order for adoption and a further order requesting a change of name.

4. SG’s parents are recorded on her birth certificate. I note pursuant to an affidavit of Deborah May Willick of 4 March 2022 that the birth mother was served with the relevant materials on 24 February 2022. The birth father was served the day before on 23 February 2022 with the relevant materials. The birth mother upon the service of the materials indicated that she would not be contesting the adoption application. It appears that the birth father likewise does not contest the adoption application.

5. SG has a number of paternal and maternal half-siblings. The question in cases such as these is whether adoption is the clearly preferable course as opposed to any alternative orders the court is empowered to make. I am satisfied having carefully reviewed the materials that SG has established a stable and loving relationship with the proposed adoptive parents and she clearly regards herself as part of their family. It has been observed by Ms Goundar the author of the s 91 report that SG has a strong and positive attachment to the proposed adoptive parents. She is very settled in her placement and it was obvious to Ms Goundar that there was a strong physical and emotional bond between SG and the proposed adoptive parents.

6. In determining whether adoption is clearly preferable the Court must have as its paramount consideration the best interests of the child concerned. Having carefully reviewed the materials, I am satisfied that restoration to either parent is not a realistic possibility. I am also satisfied that the proposed adoptive parents have demonstrated their ability to meet SG’s medical, educational, physical and emotional needs. I am satisfied that they are both committed to ensuring that SG thrives in her various activities. I am also satisfied that they will assist her in developing her independence and her own personality.

7. I am further satisfied that the proposed adoptive parents are committed and supportive of contact between SG and her birth parents and have signed a paternal and maternal adoption plan on 14 February 2022. They have facilitated contact visits with her parents and with other members of her birth family.

8. In my view, in the circumstances of this case, adoption is the clearly preferable course and I am satisfied it would be a much better course than any option including a long term care order. I do not think alternative orders would be in her best interest nor would they aide her identify and security

9. As I have formed the view that adoption is the clearly preferable course, it is appropriate that I dispense with the consent of both parents. For similar reasons, a change of name is also appropriate. I will make orders accordingly.

**********

Decision last updated: 14 April 2022