The Dutch Court of Zwolle-Lelystad ruled that the request of the (alleged) Indian Parents will be overruled due to the fact that 'Rahul' (the alleged son of these parents) said not want to cooperate.
The Dutch Court decided upon his decision, using the best interest of the child as the continues mantra. The court ruling nevertheless shows an inconsistency stating that Rahul is loyal to his adoptive parents but is considering his age (12) able to make a balanced decision.
This will conclude in the fact, that the Indian family, whose son was stolen has to wait at least until he is 18 before it will be certain this is their child or not. Besides the fact, that the UAI has the meaning that Rahul should have been protected against himself in this situation, different international examples show that evidently , Adoptees are always tangled in between emotions of several layers and interest (groups) of adoptive parents and their origin. The court should have considered this also next to the rights of (first) parents and adoptees in general. Again it looks like, that the world of adopters created another possibility to block search of parents for children they lost and also does this ruling not support adoptees who are searching for their parents abroad starting in the Netherlands. Again adoption jurisprudence will help receiving side more as the ones who lost their child.
The Dutch Court decided upon his decision, using the best interest of the child as the continues mantra. The court ruling nevertheless shows an inconsistency stating that Rahul is loyal to his adoptive parents but is considering his age (12) able to make a balanced decision.
This will conclude in the fact, that the Indian family, whose son was stolen has to wait at least until he is 18 before it will be certain this is their child or not. Besides the fact, that the UAI has the meaning that Rahul should have been protected against himself in this situation, different international examples show that evidently , Adoptees are always tangled in between emotions of several layers and interest (groups) of adoptive parents and their origin. The court should have considered this also next to the rights of (first) parents and adoptees in general. Again it looks like, that the world of adopters created another possibility to block search of parents for children they lost and also does this ruling not support adoptees who are searching for their parents abroad starting in the Netherlands. Again adoption jurisprudence will help receiving side more as the ones who lost their child.
And again, an adoptee does not comply to a social group then the adoptive world where he lives in and therefore does not have an inhibited self which might seem to be hurt. As we already stated earlier. It looks like, adoptees do have a body as transferable object but no heart and soul. At least not one, which is intrinsically bond with his family and culture of origin. Who told this boy that he would be send back to India ? And why ? The priority of the Indian family was to know if this boy was their child. Even a child – at least one who suddenly understand his adoption status, as the expert in this field reported to the court – would understand the longing for a mother and a father for her child.
And if not enough punished by this ruling, the Indian Parents have also to pay the Court Expenses of 5000 euro's.
This all might conclude an atmosphere of neo-colonialistic tendencies.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar