It seems the Adoption Board is determined to bury its head in the sand amid revelations last week in this newspaper that the key facilitator in Vietnam for Vietnamese adoptions is a convicted felon, writes Mary Raftery
She is My Linh Soland, a US citizen who served a three-year prison sentence in the late 1990s for fraud, obstruction of justice and intimidation of witnesses. It is a scandal that someone with this background ended up being chosen by the Irish adoption authorities to play such a central role in the adoption process.
The Adoption Board says that it was unaware of My Linh Soland's criminal record and has asked the Garda Síochána to investigate. Meanwhile, the board remains adamant that none of the 150 adoptions from Vietnam that were concluded with the central involvement of Ms Soland will be affected.
The Adoption Board is a peculiarly secretive organisation. It is not subject to the Freedom of Information Act, and is consequently exempt from having to release any of its internal documentation on this or any other issue.
Information Commissioner Emily O'Reilly has repeatedly criticised its omission from freedom of information provisions. The Adoption Board itself says that it would not object to its own inclusion under the Act. Minister of State for Children Brian Lenihan told me last week that he was puzzled that it was not covered under freedom of information.
In spite of all this, the fact remains that the proceedings of the Adoption Board continue to be hidden from public view. It is, of course, a public body, funded entirely by the taxpayer, with its board members appointed directly by government.
This is not the first time the board has been embroiled in controversy. In the case of toddler Tristan Dowse, abandoned by his adoptive Irish father in an Indonesian orphanage, his adoption had been recognised here in Ireland on the basis that the Adoption Board had given its stamp of approval to Indonesian adoption procedures. It subsequently transpired that Tristan was a victim of baby-trafficking, having been taken from his birth mother and sold to the Dowses.
While there is no evidence that these problems have occurred in any of the adoptions of Vietnamese babies by Irish couples, questions must nonetheless arise in the light of the involvement in the process of a convicted fraudster.
Until about three years ago, it was widely reported on international adoption agency websites that Vietnam had difficulties with corruption surrounding foreign adoptions. During 2002 and 2003, the Vietnamese authorities responded by severely curtailing all adoptions by non-Vietnamese couples.
Since then, they have put in place various safeguards; principal among them is that fully regulated government-to-government agreements must exist between Vietnam and any country seeking to adopt Vietnamese babies.
The 2004 agreement with Ireland, under which adoptions of Vietnamese babies by Irish couples were allowed to resume, stipulates that all such adoptions must go through a single mediation agency established for the purpose and licensed by both the Vietnamese and the Irish authorities.
This is the Helping Hands Adoption Mediation Agency. It is registered and regulated by the Irish Adoption Board. However, even in this area, questions arise. The CEO of this agency, Sharon O'Driscoll, was herself a member of the Adoption Board until her resignation was accepted on June 2nd.
AdoptionIreland, the group representing adopted people, has pointed to the potential for a serious conflict of interest arising from this. Sharon O'Driscoll herself denies any conflict of interest. Speaking through a public-relations company, she says that she only took up the position of CEO with Helping Hands after its official launch by Brian Lenihan on May 31st, and after her own resignation from the Adoption Board.
Curious then that Mr Lenihan should in his speech on May 31st refer to her by name, specifically describe her as CEO of Helping Hands, and thank her for her invitation to him to launch the agency.
Sharon O'Driscoll was a member of the Adoption Board during the period in 2005 when it deliberated on the selection of the mediation agency for Vietnam. Ms O'Driscoll says that as she was acquainted with some of the people involved in Helping Hands, she absented herself from those discussions. Further, she took sabbatical leave from the board earlier this year "for personal reasons".
Conflict even appears to exist over how much money Helping Hands receives from the State. The agency claims it received €100,000 for 2006. The Health Service Executive, however, says that it has paid Helping Hands just under €300,000.
Taking all of these factors into account - the nomination to a key position of someone with criminal convictions, the secrecy surrounding the Adoption Board itself, and possible conflict of interest issues - clearly there must be serious concern about the manner in which adoption is regulated in this country.