Traxa wrote:"some reasonable fees"
is very vague, and could easily lead to states essentially blocking adoptions form certain states for any reason, by including a multitude of "reasonable fees" It could also be misused to essentially block gays/certain ethnic groups/single parents from adopting that along with the ban against any additional rules or procedures is a definitive no.
There should be a limit on what reasonable fees are, with the only exceptions being if the child has other factors making adoption more tedious/costly such as medical conditions whereby it may cost the reciving state's agency more money when necessary medical tests are needed to be conducted to ensure the child is infact healthy enough for an international adoption
I think the issue of states blocking adoptions via this and that has already been addressed in this discussion (this being a reference to the discussion on good faith compliance).
Anyway, the clause pointed out by Normlpeople regarding adding protocols and what not to the standards of the WAAA is my primary issue with this proposal, although the fact remains that the rest of this proposal is sensible, and I believe the gnomes could make a good enough set of standards for this whole assembly, being, well, gnomes. Hence, Mundiferrum shall be voting for this proposal.
EDIT:
Im starting to think people just read the titles on these things and if it sounds warm and fuzzy they vote yes
Really ambassador? Only now do you realize this? I've only been active in the WA for less than six months and I already note that!
