NATION

PASSWORD

[WITHDRAWN] International Adoption Act

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
Greater Sanctum
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 57
Founded: Dec 29, 2009
Ex-Nation

[WITHDRAWN] International Adoption Act

Postby Greater Sanctum » Wed Dec 30, 2009 8:31 pm

Here is a draft for a proposal to be submitted. Please post any suggestions that you feel could be improved. All help is appreciated.
(BTW this is my first proposal, so forgive any mistakes and/or omissions)
[UPDATE: THIS WILL NO LONGER BE SUBMITTED UNDER THIS NATIONS NAME. IT WILL EVENTUALLY BE SUBMITTED UNDER Hindopia's NAME ONCE I GET THE REQUIRED 2 ENDORSEMENTS. This is due to me creating another nation which I will be making my WA nation. Please forgive any inconvenience.

----------

INTERNATIONAL ADOPTION ACT

Category: Moral Decency
Strength: Mild
Proposed By: Greater Sanctum

The World Assembly,

RECOGNISING every childs right to be given adequate care, including the provision of adequate nourishment, clothing, shelter and the protection from all forms of abuse, and to be provided with adequate education and medical care when needed.

UNDERSTANDING that international adoption may be a child’s only chance at achieving the rights stated above.

REALISING that some individuals and/or parties may take advantage of desperate situations by requiring payment to ensure that a child be either put up for adoption or for the child to be adopted by prospective adoptive parents.

CONVINCED that to ensure international adoptions are made with regard to the rights and interests of the child, which are paramount to those of any other party involved in the process, and that no illegal dealings are made during the adoption every Member State must create an accredited Authority to handle the international adoption process in their nation.

ACKNOWLEDGING that in the interests of cultural preservation the child has a right to knowledge of his or her country of origin and the cultures contained therein.

DECLARING that a child adopted as the result of an international adoption has, when reaching an age of mature understanding, the right to return to his or her country of origin if he or she so wishes.

DEFINING:

- MEMBER STATE: any nation which is a member of the World Assembly.

- INTERNATIONAL ADOPTION: the process in which a child from one Member State is adopted by parents from another Member State.

- ACCREDITED AUTHORITY: a central agency created by a Member State that handles all of that nations international adoptions and ensures that the adoptions adhere to the terms of the resolution.

DECLARING the terms of the resolution to be:

(1) Member States shall ensure that no party involved in an international adoption has been coerced into participating in the process.

(2) Member States shall take appropriate measures to ensure that no adoption is the result of the abduction, sale or traffic of a child.

(3) Member States shall ensure that the child has a legitimate need to be adopted and that international adoption is the best option.

(4) Member States shall ensure that no party involved in the adoption has received financial or compensatory incentive to pursue the adoption.

(5) Member States shall ensure that all responsible parties involved are mentally competent to proceed with the adoption.

(6) Member States shall ensure that all parties involved in the adoption understand (with the exception of infants and small children not yet at an age of understanding) what the process will entail, and that all parties involved expressly give their consent to the adoption in writing. When the adoption concerns an infant or small child not yet at an age of understanding, only the express written consent of the child's parent(s) or legal guardian(s) is needed to begin the proceedings.

(7) Member States shall create an accredited Authority which shall oversee all adoptions taking place in their own nation and adhere to the terms of this resolution.

(8)If a Member State is concerned that another Member State may be in violation of this resolution, an investigation must be launched. If any violation is found, all Member States shall immediately cease all adoptions with the Member State in violation until the violation is found to be rectified by an independent investigation.
Last edited by Greater Sanctum on Fri Jan 08, 2010 6:09 am, edited 8 times in total.
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."

Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
DefCon currently at: 1 2 3 4 [5]
Armed Forces:
Standing Army - 19,000
Reserves: 5,000

User avatar
Greater Sanctum
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 57
Founded: Dec 29, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Greater Sanctum » Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 am

bump
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."

Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
DefCon currently at: 1 2 3 4 [5]
Armed Forces:
Standing Army - 19,000
Reserves: 5,000

User avatar
Greater Sanctum
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 57
Founded: Dec 29, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Greater Sanctum » Fri Jan 01, 2010 12:52 am

Last bump before submission.
EDIT: Ok, as it's NYD I'll wait a couple more days. Let the people celebrate :)
Last edited by Greater Sanctum on Fri Jan 01, 2010 2:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."

Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
DefCon currently at: 1 2 3 4 [5]
Armed Forces:
Standing Army - 19,000
Reserves: 5,000

User avatar
Enn
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1228
Founded: Jan 26, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Enn » Fri Jan 01, 2010 1:06 am

Greater Sanctum wrote:Last bump before submission.

OOC: I know you posted this over on the IDU forum as well, which I haven't had a chance to properly look at. I'd suggest waiting on a few days at least, so more people can have a look over it - It's New Year's Day, lots of people may well be still celebrating/getting over the celebrations of last night.
I know what gay science is.
Reploid Productions wrote:The World Assembly as a whole terrifies me!
Pythagosaurus wrote:You are seriously deluded about the technical competence of the average human.

User avatar
William Bettingham
Civilian
 
Posts: 1
Founded: Apr 12, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby William Bettingham » Fri Jan 01, 2010 1:24 am

Well, I see no problem with this. I am the Vice Delegate in the New Britannian Empire, a region, and we shall support this as a region.

User avatar
Greater Sanctum
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 57
Founded: Dec 29, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Greater Sanctum » Fri Jan 01, 2010 2:37 am

William Bettingham wrote:Well, I see no problem with this. I am the Vice Delegate in the New Britannian Empire, a region, and we shall support this as a region.

Thank you. Your support is greatly appreciated.

Enn wrote:OOC: I know you posted this over on the IDU forum as well, which I haven't had a chance to properly look at. I'd suggest waiting on a few days at least, so more people can have a look over it - It's New Year's Day, lots of people may well be still celebrating/getting over the celebrations of last night.

Yeah true. I'll give it a few more days. :)
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."

Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
DefCon currently at: 1 2 3 4 [5]
Armed Forces:
Standing Army - 19,000
Reserves: 5,000

User avatar
A mean old man
Senator
 
Posts: 4386
Founded: Jun 27, 2008
Father Knows Best State

Postby A mean old man » Fri Jan 01, 2010 3:02 pm

From an IC standpoint, the idea makes my extremely reclusive and oppressive leader a bit uncomfortable, though not entirely turned away.

From an OOC standpoint, I like the idea, but the writing of the proposal may need some tweaking before it's ready. Also, are you sure it's not too big?

Oh, in the future you might want to avoid bumping. I know some forums allow it, but the NS forums aren't particularly friendly towards bumping, and people are often warned for it.
A: SC#16 - Repeal "Liberate The Security Council"
A: SC#26 - Commend The Joint Systems Alliance
A: SC#30 - Commend 10000 Islands
A: SC#37 - Condemn NAZI EUROPE
A: SC#38 - Repeal "Condemn NAZI EUROPE"
A: GA#149 - On Expiration Dates
C: SC#58 - Repeal "Commend Sedgistan"
A: SC#62 - Repeal "Condemn Swarmlandia"
C: SC#63 - Commend Ballotonia
A: SC#65 - Condemn Punk Reloaded
C: GA#163 - Repeal "Law of the Sea"
A: SC#72 - Repeal "Commend Mikeswill"
C: SC#74 - Condemn Lone Wolves United
C: SC#76 - Repeal "Condemn Thatcherton"
A: SC#81 - Repeal "Condemn Anthony Delasanta"
C: SC#83 - Condemn Automagfreek
C: SC#84 - Repeal "Liberate Islam"
C: SC#111 - Commend Krulltopia ← please forget

User avatar
Greater Sanctum
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 57
Founded: Dec 29, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Greater Sanctum » Sat Jan 02, 2010 12:05 am

Well, it doesn't force people to actually be involved in international adoption, only if the nation actually wants it.
And as per your other question, I've done a character count, and it comes in at under 3,500 characters, so it'll fit in the submission box.
And as for the bumping, I didn't know so I'll try to keep away from that in the future. :)
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."

Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
DefCon currently at: 1 2 3 4 [5]
Armed Forces:
Standing Army - 19,000
Reserves: 5,000

User avatar
Benedict of Nursia
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 10
Founded: Jul 12, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Benedict of Nursia » Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:10 am

After considering this legislation, I am happy to report that the government of the Holy Republic wholeheartedly supports this proposal. I do believe some of the wording may need a bit work though, only in one or two spots. Once we get a few more ideas regarding support, I will offer my recommendation regarding said wording.

I will also bring this to the attention of the New Krypton region and our World Assembly delegate to get their thoughts on the issue at hand.

Pax et bonum!
Sir D.J.B. McGowan, KCSB
Ambassador to the World Assembly from the Holy Republic of Benedict of Nursia

User avatar
Reseda Island
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 394
Founded: Mar 13, 2008
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Reseda Island » Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:29 am

yes I shall support this
"Fear not the path of truth for the lack of people walking on it." -RFK June 5th 1968

User avatar
Lelouche
Minister
 
Posts: 2264
Founded: Nov 21, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Lelouche » Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:38 am

Recognising every child’s right to live in a carefree and loving environment for the comfort and safety of his or herself.


We don't

We only recognize the child's right to prepared for life as an adult, and to not be unduly abused, although discipline is considered a must.

other than that, this proposal is entirely reasonable.
Gun control is for wimps and commies.

Let's get one thing straight: guns don't kill people.... I do.

User avatar
Slaytesics
Minister
 
Posts: 2248
Founded: Aug 20, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Slaytesics » Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:41 am

My support
My favorite quotes.

Ballotonia wrote:Total BS.
Wanna meet girls? Go play Farmville.
Ballotonia

Timurid Empire wrote:I do not understand people like this. How can you fear any human being or interaction with them? We are all Human, and we all bleed the same. Unless their a Hemophiliac.


Lunatic Goofballs wrote:(Image)


Ranbo wrote:Heey! I'm not perv!

You name it, you claim it. You were the one that thought of it in the first place. :p

User avatar
Charlotte Ryberg
The Muse of the Westcountry
 
Posts: 15007
Founded: Mar 14, 2007
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Charlotte Ryberg » Sat Jan 02, 2010 3:56 pm

Shouldn't this draft be categorised as social justice, mild?

I cannot say that this draft is ready to be submitted just yet: importantly, you will need to ensure that the clauses do not duplicate those as provided by the Child Protection Act. For example, it already illegal to sexually abuse a child and that includes foster parents.

User avatar
Greater Sanctum
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 57
Founded: Dec 29, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Greater Sanctum » Sat Jan 02, 2010 6:39 pm

Lelouche wrote:
Recognising every child’s right to live in a carefree and loving environment for the comfort and safety of his or herself.


We don't

We only recognize the child's right to prepared for life as an adult, and to not be unduly abused, although discipline is considered a must.

other than that, this proposal is entirely reasonable.


a) A child is entitled to be cared for, to be given sustenance, shelter, clothing, not to be deprived of education, to receive adequate medical care, and not to be physically or emotionally abused

This is an excerpt from the Child Protection Act. Should I change the first line to better reflect this. It wouldn't be simply copying, just reinforcing that right.
Charlotte Ryberg wrote:Shouldn't this draft be categorised as social justice, mild?

I cannot say that this draft is ready to be submitted just yet: importantly, you will need to ensure that the clauses do not duplicate those as provided by the Child Protection Act. For example, it already illegal to sexually abuse a child and that includes foster parents.

I've read through the Child Protection Act and nothing except the quote above really matches to what is in this Act. There is nothing in this proposal about the sexual abuse by foster parents. This is a proposal to prevent the sale, traffic etc. of children in the interest of adoption. Such as people offering another parent money to buy their child off of them. And I think that it's better suited to the category "Moral Decency" because "Social Justice" is about income inequality and social welfare.
Last edited by Greater Sanctum on Sat Jan 02, 2010 6:44 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."

Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
DefCon currently at: 1 2 3 4 [5]
Armed Forces:
Standing Army - 19,000
Reserves: 5,000

User avatar
Benedict of Nursia
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 10
Founded: Jul 12, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Benedict of Nursia » Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:01 am

I would have to agree with Lelouche, at least to a point. While it would be ideal that a child have a carefree and loving upbringing, the reality is that not all do, and this is not necessarily a prerequisite to being a well-adjusted, happy, adult (although it helps). You can not "impose" a carefree childhood. I do like the language that you quoted from the Child Protection Act, and think that it would be better suited if you reworked that and put something similar into this proposal, rather than that first line.

Also, the first point under Declaring should focus on the parents as well, and making sure they are not being coerced into giving/taking the child for adoption, although a mention of children who have reached the age of reason should be clearly free of coercion as well would be beneficial. In it's present form, it sounds as if that line is talking about children alone, and this can not be the case, as infants have not yet reached the age of reason...

Pax et bonum!
Sir D.J.B. McGowan, KCSB
Ambassador to the World Assembly from the Holy Republic of Benedict of Nursia

User avatar
Greater Sanctum
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 57
Founded: Dec 29, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Greater Sanctum » Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:45 am

UPDATED
Adressed the issues with first "Recognising" and clause 1 of the terms under "Declaring. Also added a section onto clause 6 of the terms:
When the adoption concerns an infant or small child not yet at an age of understanding, only the express written consent of the child's parents is needed to begin the proceedings.


Also, quick question: when submitting the proposal, should I keep the codes for underlining and boldface or should I just caps the words such as "Recognizing", "Declaring" etc?
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."

Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
DefCon currently at: 1 2 3 4 [5]
Armed Forces:
Standing Army - 19,000
Reserves: 5,000

User avatar
Enn
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1228
Founded: Jan 26, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Enn » Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:55 am

Greater Sanctum wrote:UPDATED
Adressed the issues with first "Recognising" and clause 1 of the terms under "Declaring. Also added a section onto clause 6 of the terms:
When the adoption concerns an infant or small child not yet at an age of understanding, only the express written consent of the child's parents is needed to begin the proceedings.

And when said child is an orphan?

Also, quick question: when submitting the proposal, should I keep the codes for underlining and boldface or should I just caps the words such as "Recognizing", "Declaring" etc?

Having them in all caps is commonly seen. We're old-fashioned here at the GA, no need to frighten the oldies by using bbcode :P
I know what gay science is.
Reploid Productions wrote:The World Assembly as a whole terrifies me!
Pythagosaurus wrote:You are seriously deluded about the technical competence of the average human.

User avatar
Grays Harbor
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18574
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Grays Harbor » Sun Jan 03, 2010 2:26 am

Enn wrote:
Greater Sanctum wrote:UPDATED
Adressed the issues with first "Recognising" and clause 1 of the terms under "Declaring. Also added a section onto clause 6 of the terms:
When the adoption concerns an infant or small child not yet at an age of understanding, only the express written consent of the child's parents is needed to begin the proceedings.

And when said child is an orphan?

Also, quick question: when submitting the proposal, should I keep the codes for underlining and boldface or should I just caps the words such as "Recognizing", "Declaring" etc?

Having them in all caps is commonly seen. We're old-fashioned here at the GA, no need to frighten the oldies by using bbcode :P


Murray, the ambassadorial assistant, looked uncommonly innocent for the first time in his life. It was most likely due to the fact he was trying very very hard to look innocent. Mostly because of the wet sponge which had mysteriously flown past the head of the ambassador from Enn and landed on their desk, and the pile of papers on it.
Everything you know about me is wrong. Or a rumor. Something like that.

Not Ta'veren

User avatar
Benedict of Nursia
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 10
Founded: Jul 12, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Benedict of Nursia » Sun Jan 03, 2010 2:26 am

Enn wrote:
Greater Sanctum wrote:UPDATED
When the adoption concerns an infant or small child not yet at an age of understanding, only the express written consent of the child's parents is needed to begin the proceedings.

And when said child is an orphan?


Language could be changed to "child's parents or legal guardians" which would include custodial officials in an orphanage.

Enn wrote:Having them in all caps is commonly seen. We're old-fashioned here at the GA, no need to frighten the oldies by using bbcode :P


Indeed, all-caps seems to be the norm around here. :)
Sir D.J.B. McGowan, KCSB
Ambassador to the World Assembly from the Holy Republic of Benedict of Nursia

User avatar
Greater Sanctum
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 57
Founded: Dec 29, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Greater Sanctum » Sun Jan 03, 2010 2:53 am

UPDATED
Thanks for the suggestions :)
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."

Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
DefCon currently at: 1 2 3 4 [5]
Armed Forces:
Standing Army - 19,000
Reserves: 5,000

User avatar
Greater Sanctum
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 57
Founded: Dec 29, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Greater Sanctum » Sun Jan 03, 2010 7:30 pm

UPDATED
I revised the final paragraph to bring the character count under 3,500.
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."

Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
DefCon currently at: 1 2 3 4 [5]
Armed Forces:
Standing Army - 19,000
Reserves: 5,000

User avatar
Greater Sanctum
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 57
Founded: Dec 29, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Greater Sanctum » Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:12 am

I'm thinking of submitting it soon. Do you guys think it's ready?
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."

Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
DefCon currently at: 1 2 3 4 [5]
Armed Forces:
Standing Army - 19,000
Reserves: 5,000

User avatar
Bears Armed
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 21479
Founded: Jun 01, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bears Armed » Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:38 am

Greater Sanctum wrote:(5) Member States shall ensure that all mature aged parties involved are mentally competent to proceed with the adoption.

The term "mature aged parties" seems a rather unusual contruction. Why not just "adults"?
Incidentally, what if the parent who is giving the child up for adoption is themselves 'under-age' by their nation's laws? Would the consent of their parents or legal guardians be required?
The Confrederated Clans (and other Confrederated Bodys) of the Free Bears of Bears Armed
(includes The Ursine NorthLands) Demonym = Bear[s]; adjective = ‘Urrsish’.
Population = just under 20 million. Economy = only Thriving. Average Life expectancy = c.60 years. If the nation is classified as 'Anarchy' there still is a [strictly limited] national government... and those aren't "biker gangs", they're traditional cross-Clan 'Warrior Societies', generally respected rather than feared.
Author of some GA Resolutions, via Bears Armed Mission; subject of an SC resolution.
Factbook. We have more than 70 MAPS. Visitors' Guide.
The IDU's WA Drafting Room is open to help you.
Author of issues #429, 712, 729, 934, 1120, 1152, 1474, 1521.

User avatar
Benedict of Nursia
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 10
Founded: Jul 12, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Benedict of Nursia » Mon Jan 04, 2010 12:23 pm

Bears Armed wrote:
Greater Sanctum wrote:(5) Member States shall ensure that all mature aged parties involved are mentally competent to proceed with the adoption.

The term "mature aged parties" seems a rather unusual contruction. Why not just "adults"?
Incidentally, what if the parent who is giving the child up for adoption is themselves 'under-age' by their nation's laws? Would the consent of their parents or legal guardians be required?


Hmmm... Instead of "mature aged," what about "responsible parties?" I believe this would cover younger parents as well...
Sir D.J.B. McGowan, KCSB
Ambassador to the World Assembly from the Holy Republic of Benedict of Nursia

User avatar
Greater Sanctum
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 57
Founded: Dec 29, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Greater Sanctum » Wed Jan 06, 2010 2:43 am

UPDATED
I decided to go with "responsible parties"
Buffett and Colbert wrote:Whenever a teacher gets mad at me for using Wikipedia as a source, I'll just say, "If it's good enough for the Australian government, it's good enough for me."

Blouman Empire wrote:The Australian people are like a battered wife, they get abused and told what to do because it is best for them and they continue to love the government.
DefCon currently at: 1 2 3 4 [5]
Armed Forces:
Standing Army - 19,000
Reserves: 5,000

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Simone Republic

Advertisement

Remove ads