Proposition 54K1152

Projet de loi modifiant le Code civil, en ce qui concerne l'adoption.

General information ¶

Authors

Ecolo Muriel Gerkens
Groen Stefaan Van Hecke

Submission date

June 9, 2015

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

adoption of a child civil law child protection stepfamily parental authority sexual minority

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP DéFI ∉ Open Vld N-VA LDD MR PVDA | PTB PP

Abstained from voting

VB

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

Feb. 9, 2017 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

The speakers are mr. Miller and Mrs. Van Cauter.

I am referring to the written report.

Mr. Speaker, I understood from the press that we have contributed to the moment of glory of colleague Van Hecke.

We agree with the proposal because we consider the new formulation important. What is it about? The proposal aims to solve adoption problems when couples, in this case cattle couples, are adopted. By the way, the problems had already become less pronounced and even partially corrected thanks to a previous legislative initiative, which I wrote with at the time, in particular the law on the mother-in-law.

Our group – I can say that – has made an important contribution to the updating of the legislation on adoption, in this case the conditions imposed. The text gives the judge the possibility to allow adoption against the will of a parent. We have set precise conditions, clarified the legal framework and included legal cohabitants and actual cohabitants who have lived together for three years.

Mr. Speaker, it often happens that it takes some time before the government or parliament provides an appropriate response to new decisions of the Constitutional Court, which we have been informed of. Therefore, we are now discussing a proposal that we initially submitted in response to a 2012 Constitutional Court judgment signaling a problem with equality. An adoption can indeed be refused without real reasons, for example because of the orientation of an adopter. It was our intention to remedy this.

Since some time has passed, amendments to the legislation have already taken place. Furthermore, in the meantime, the Constitutional Court has also issued new judgments on the subject, which required the adjustment we have proposed to be updated and expanded in accordance with those much more recent judgments of the Constitutional Court.

I found the constructive cooperation with members of the majority for this proposal no problem at all and thanked them and the Cabinet of the Minister very much for this. In this way, we were able to update the text, which was based on a 2012 judgment.

The text, which may seem quite complex from a technical-legal point of view, could in practice make a world of difference for many people who had previously faced a problem. That is still the most important thing.

Again, I thank the Members of Parliament and hope that the proposal will give us a good response to a number of judgments of the Constitutional Court.

Mr. Speaker, I submitted this proposal with my colleague Stefaan Van Hecke, but I only had the opportunity to introduce it because I was taken by the work of the Health Committee.

I would also like to thank the members of the Justice Committee for examining this bill, which was submitted in the previous legislature by our colleague, Zoé Genot, to address the difficulties encountered in particular by gay, gay or lesbian couples. In fact, it was mandatory to obtain the consent of the second parent in order to be able to proceed with the adoption of a child with whom they have an affective and material bond.

I thank you for this work that will enable all these people to fulfill their role of parents towards children with whom they share great parts of life.