The Adoption of Laura (a pseudonym)

1. [1]

   These reasons concern an application for the adoption of a child who I will call “Laura”, aged 6 years old, in favour of “Maggie”, aged 53 years old. Maggie does not have any biological children, and she is not currently in a relationship.

2. [2]

   By summons filed on 4 November 2025, the Secretary, Department of Communities and Justice (‘Secretary’) by his delegate, the Principal Officer, Adoptions, Barnardos Australia (‘Barnardos’) seeks the following relief:

   1. (1)

      a declaration pursuant to s 21(2) of the Status of Children Act 1996 (NSW) that “Jeremy” is the birth father of Laura;

   2. (2)

      an order pursuant to s 19(2) of the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act 1995 (NSW), for the inclusion of Jeremy as the father of Laura in the Register of Births, Deaths and Marriages (‘Register’);

   3. (3)

      an order pursuant to s 67(1)(d) of the Adoption Act 2000 (NSW), that the consent of Jeremy, as Laura’s birth father, be dispensed with;

   4. (4)

      an order pursuant to s 67(1)(d) of the Adoption Act, that the consent of “Isla”, as Laura’s birth mother, be dispensed with;

   5. (5)

      an order pursuant to s 23 of the Adoption Act, for the adoption of Laura in favour of Maggie as the adopting parent;

   6. (6)

      an order pursuant to s 101(1) of the Adoption Act, approving the proposed names for the child;

   7. (7)

      an order pursuant to s 50(1) and s 50(3) of the Adoption Act that the Maternal Adoption Plan signed by Maggie on 28 October 2025, Isla on 28 October 2025, and Barnardos’ Principal Officer (‘Principal Officer’), on 4 November 2025, be registered; and

   8. (8)

      an order pursuant to s 50(1) and s 50(3) of the Adoption Act that the Paternal Adoption Plan signed by Maggie on 28 October 2025 and the Principal Officer on 4 November 2025, be registered.

3. [3]

   For the reasons set out below, I propose to grant the relief sought by the summons.

The circumstances of this case

1. [4]

   Laura was born in New South Wales in mid-2019.

2. [5]

   As registered on her birth certificate, Laura’s birth mother is Isla. Isla was 16 years old when she gave birth to Laura and she is now 22 years old. She does not have any other children.

3. [6]

   No birth father is identified on Laura’s birth certificate; however, Jeremy considers himself to be Laura’s birth father. He is currently 25 years old. DNA testing concluded that there was a 99.99993% probability that Jeremy was Laura’s birth father.

4. [7]

   Isla was provided with extensive casework support both before and after Laura’s birth. The Department’s ongoing interventions failed to reduce the unacceptable risk of harm to Laura if she were to remain in Isla’s care.

5. [8]

   The Department received 40 Risk of Significant Harm Reports (‘ROSH Reports’) in relation to Laura’s care prior to her removal. These ROSH Reports referenced concerns for Isla’s mental health, domestic and family violence, drug use, neglect, physical abuse, dangerous behaviour involving a child, sexual exploitation, risk of sexual abuse, risk of significant neglect, inadequate supervision, inadequate basic care and hazardous living conditions.

6. [9]

   Prior to Laura being removed from Isla’s care, she was occasionally residing at “Hannah’s” residence, her maternal grandmother. The Department reported that the residence was not clean or fit for a child, with minimal edible food available and unsafe people visiting.

7. [10]

   On 3 April 2019, Maggie was approved by Barnardos as a dually authorised carer and adoptive parent.

8. [11]

   On 14 April 2022, Laura was removed from Isla’s care and placed with short-term carers.

9. [12]

   On 19 April 2022, Laura was transitioned to authorised short-term carers with Barnardos.

10. [13]

    Later in April 2022, the Secretary filed an Emergency Care and Protection Application to initiate care proceedings in the Children’s Court of New South Wales. This application expressed ongoing concerns for Laura’s safety, welfare and wellbeing.

11. [14]

    On 3 May 2022, Laura was placed with a Barnardos short-term carer and she remained in her care until she transitioned in Maggie’s care.

12. [15]

    In September 2022, the Secretary filed a Care Plan in relation to Laura with the Children’s Court. This Care Plan concluded that restoration of Laura to her birth parents was not a realistic outcome and proposed that parental responsibility for Laura be allocated to the Minister.

13. [16]

    In February 2023, the Children’s Court held that restoration of Laura to her birth parents was not viable and final orders were made allocating parental responsibility for Laura to the Minister until she reaches 18 years of age.

14. [17]

    In March 2023, Laura was placed with Maggie for permanent care and a view to adoption. Laura was 3 years old at this time.

15. [18]

    In April 2023, case management for Laura was transferred from the Department to Barnardos for a permanent placement.

16. [19]

    In July 2024, Laura’s paternal aunt, “Katy”, expressed her desire to be assessed as Laura’s kinship carer. Barnardos provided support to Katy and encouraged her to complete the necessary paperwork but she did not proceed with her foreshadowed application.

Section 90 Proceedings

1. [20]

   In late 2024, Isla filed a leave application in the Children’s Court for a rescission or variation of Laura’s final care order under s 90 of the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998. Isla was provided with Legal Aid support in relation to this application.

2. [21]

   Maggie was joined as a party to the application and an independent legal representative was appointed to protect Laura’s interests.

3. [22]

   A Children’s Court Clinic NSW Assessment Report was prepared which recommended that Laura remain in Maggie’s care and restoration to Isla was not recommended.

4. [23]

   In August 2025, a dispute resolution conference was held and Isla later withdrew her application. Isla expressed that she did not want to put herself or Laura through a court hearing.

The identity of the birth father

1. [24]

   In October 2024, Jeremy underwent DNA testing to identify whether he was Laura’s birth father. The DNA test results found that there was a 99.99993% probability that Jeremy was Laura’s birth father.

2. [25]

   In mid-2025, the Department provided Barnardos with consent to make an application to the Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages for Jeremy to be included on Laura’s birth certificate as her birth father.

3. [26]

   In September 2025, Barnardos filed an application with the Registry to action this change.

4. [27]

   Later in October 2025, the Registry informed Barnardos that one of the parents of the child must sign the application before this change could occur.

5. [28]

   I am satisfied that it is almost certain that Jeremy is Laura’s birth father. Accordingly, I will make the declaration sought pursuant to s 21(2) of the Status of Children Act.

6. [29]

   As a result, I will also make an order pursuant to s 19(2) of the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act for the inclusion of Jeremy as Laura’s birth father in the Register.

The formal requirements for adoption

1. [30]

   The formal requirements of the Adoption Act have been satisfied in this case, namely:

   1. (1)

      Isla has been served with sufficient notice of the application for adoption orders (s 88(1)(a));

   2. (2)

      Jeremy has been served with sufficient notice of the application for adoption orders (s 88(1)(a));

   3. (3)

      Laura was present in New South Wales when these proceedings were commenced (s 23(2)(a));

   4. (4)

      Maggie was resident and domiciled in New South Wales when these proceedings were commenced (s 27(1)(a));

   5. (5)

      a report regarding Maggie has been provided to the Court (s 91(1));

   6. (6)

      Maggie is of good repute and is a fit and proper person to fulfil the responsibilities of parenthood (s 27(1)(b));

   7. (7)

      Maggie has been selected in accordance with the Adoption Act (s 90(1)(c)); and

   8. (8)

      Maggie satisfies the age requirements (s 27(2)(a)).

Whether adoption is in the best interests of the child

1. [31]

   In reaching my decision, I must have regard (as far as practicable and appropriate) to the principles outlined in s 8(1) of the Adoption Act, including that adoption must be regarded as a service for the child, and not as a right of the adult with whom they are placed. The paramount consideration in any decision concerning a child’s adoption is what is in the child’s best interests, both in childhood and later in life.

2. [32]

   I cannot make an adoption order in relation to Laura unless I am satisfied that her best interests will be advanced through her adoption by Maggie, and that, as far as practicable and having regard to Laura’s age and understanding, her wishes and feelings have been fully ascertained and proper attention has been given to them: s 90(1) of the Adoption Act.

3. [33]

   In considering what is in Laura’s best interests, I have had regard to the matters outlined in s 8(2) of the Adoption Act, relevantly:

   1. (1)

      any wishes expressed by Laura in relation to her proposed adoption;

   2. (2)

      Laura’s age, maturity, level of understanding, gender, background, family relationships and any other characteristics that I considered relevant;

   3. (3)

      the physical, emotional and educational needs of Laura, including her sense of personal, familial and cultural identity;

   4. (4)

      any wishes expressed by Isla or Jeremy in relation to Laura’s proposed adoption;

   5. (5)

      the relationship that Laura has with Isla, Jeremy, her paternal sister, “Zara” and other significant people in her life;

   6. (6)

      Maggie’s attitude towards Laura and the responsibilities that are associated with parenthood;

   7. (7)

      the nature of the relationship that Laura has formed with Maggie;

   8. (8)

      the suitability and capacity of Maggie to provide for Laura’s needs, including her emotional and intellectual needs; and

   9. (9)

      the need to protect Laura from physical or psychological harm caused, or that may be caused, by being subjected or exposed to abuse, ill-treatment, violence or other behaviour, or being present while a third person is subjected or exposed to abuse, ill-treatment, violence or other behaviour.

4. [34]

   A judicial evaluation must be conducted in assessing Laura’s best interests, balancing an array of relevant factors from which an overall conclusion can be reached. For the reasons outlined below, my evaluation in Laura’s case leans strongly in favour of her adoption by Maggie.

5. [35]

   Laura demonstrates an age-appropriate understanding of open adoption. Maggie proactively facilitates conversations with Laura about open adoption and Laura has voiced her understanding that she has “two mums and one dad”.

6. [36]

   I am confident that Maggie will provide Laura with the love, attention and care that she undoubtedly deserves. The evidence before me illustrates that Maggie provides a high level of care to Laura, prioritising her physical, emotional and educational needs in a consistent and thoughtful way.

7. [37]

   Laura is clearly thriving in Maggie’s care. Laura’s teacher has described her as a bubbly child with a strong personality and her school report references the many “wonderful personal gains” that she is making in school. The evidence demonstrates that Laura is an active child, participating in a wide variety of co-curricular activities.

8. [38]

   Laura is a healthy child. Maggie has demonstrated a proactive approach to maintaining Laura’s overall health. Since commencing school, Laura has attended weekly therapy sessions to assist with her emotional regulation, and she has been provided with a therapy support plan. The therapy support plan states that Laura is learning to navigate complex social interactions at school and that she is working on her negotiation skills to collaborate effectively with others.

9. [39]

   Maggie demonstrates a positive attitude regarding the responsibilities associated with parenthood and her devotion to Laura. Maggie sets clear boundaries with Laura whilst also embracing a child-focused and trauma-informed approach to parenting, appreciating the challenges that Laura has confronted over her life. She has developed a consistent routine with Laura, including reading together before bed. Laura has adapted well to the consistent structure in her life.

10. [40]

    Laura has fostered a strong relationship with Maggie and she refers to her as “Mummy”. The evidence demonstrates that Laura and Maggie enjoy travelling together and spending quality time with their dog.

11. [41]

    Maggie has demonstrated a strong desire for Laura to be a permanent part of her family. Maggie clearly wants Laura to feel confident about her future and to protect her from the uncertainty she experienced prior to being placed in her care. The evidence indicates that Laura has formed a strong connection with Maggie’s extended family. Laura has also celebrated important cultural events with Maggie’s family, including Christmas. The evidence also indicates that Laura has developed a positive relationship with Maggie’s parents, who are referred to as ‘Nan’ and ‘Pop’. Laura enjoys spending quality time with Maggie’s parents and Maggie’s father has helped Laura to make a memory box to store her personal trinkets and memorabilia.

12. [42]

    I am confident that Maggie will help Laura further understand her birth family history and what open adoption means through Life Story work. Laura has already embarked on this journey, with Maggie helping her to add photographs and information from her birth family and her earlier placements.

13. [43]

    The evidence reveals that Maggie has consistently arranged family time visits for Laura since she was placed in her care. Maggie has attended all visits and has facilitated visits with Laura’s birth family independently since mid-2023. She has also demonstrated adaptability in her ability to meet Laura’s need to maintain authentic relationships with her birth family, such as facilitating video calls with Jeremy when he was incarnated for a period of time. I am confident that Maggie will continue to support Laura in strengthening her birth family connections in the event an adoption order is made.

14. [44]

    In relation to cultural heritage, Laura is Anglo-Australian on her maternal and paternal sides. Neither Isla nor Jeremy have expressed a desire for Laura to adhere to any religion or specific cultural practice. Isla has stated that she celebrates Christmas and that she would like Laura to do the same. Maggie identifies as a non-practising Catholic, and she is raising Laura in the Catholic tradition.

15. [45]

    The application for adoption is supported by an adoption report. Strong referee certificates in support of Maggie have also been filed.

Laura’s sibling

1. [46]

   Laura has a paternal sister, Zara, who was born in mid-2018.

2. [47]

   The Minister holds parental responsibility for Zara until she turns 18 years old. The evidence indicates that Zara is also residing in out-of-home care.

3. [48]

   In June 2022, whilst Laura was in a temporary foster care placement, she met Zara. The children reportedly enjoyed each other’s company. Following this visit, Barnardos were unsuccessful in their attempts to arrange further visits between Laura and Zara.

4. [49]

   Maggie has successfully initiated and facilitated further visits between Laura and Zara.

5. [50]

   In accordance with Laura’s best interests, Maggie has demonstrated proactivity in helping Laura develop strong relationships with Zara. The evidence indicates Maggie’s understanding of the crucial need to maintain the sibling bond that Laura has with her sister.

The birth parents

1. [51]

   When considering Laura’s best interests, I must have regard to the relationships that Isla and Jeremy have each formed with Laura and any wishes they, as Laura’s birth parents, have expressed regarding her adoption.

2. [52]

   Jeremy has not signed any formal instrument of consent in relation to Laura’s adoption, and he has expressed a desire for Laura to be restored to his care in the future. He is listed as a defendant in these proceedings, but no appearance has been recorded on the record in opposition to the relief sought.

3. [53]

   Isla has not signed any formal instrument of consent in relation to Laura’s adoption, and she has historically opposed the adoption. Isla has expressed a desire for Laura to be restored to her care in the future.

4. [54]

   The relationship between Laura and Jeremy is strong. Jeremy moved interstate in 2024 and he has been proactive in scheduling video calls and visits with Laura where possible. The evidence indicates they enjoy each other’s company.

5. [55]

   The relationship between Laura and Isla is also strong. Laura expresses enthusiasm upon seeing Isla. The evidence indicates that Isla and Laura enjoy diverse outings together.

6. [56]

   In April 2024, the Barnardos Adoption Approval Panel endorsed a reduction in visits with Isla and Jeremy from 12 to 9 face-to-face visits per year, with the introduction of 3 additional video calls for each of them. This alteration was made due to the impact the face-to-face visits were having on Laura’s sleep quality and with consideration that she was commencing school in 2025. This reduction in contact visits was made with the objective of providing Laura with greater emotional recovery time between visits and to improve the overall quality of the visits with her birth parents.

Whether adoption clearly preferable in the best interests of the child

1. [57]

   I cannot make an adoption order unless I am satisfied that such an order is clearly preferable in the best interests of Laura than any other action which could be taken by law in relation to Laura’s care: s 90(3) of the Adoption Act.

2. [58]

   On the evidence, I must be satisfied that there is more than a “slight preponderance” of considerations in favour of Laura’s adoption over any other available alternatives: Adoption of RCC and RZA [2015] NSWSC 813 at [14]. I must achieve the degree of conviction in favour of Laura’s adoption commensurate with the gravity of the decision that is being made: Application of A - re D [2006] NSWSC 1056; 36 Fam LR 142 at [53]. In determining whether an adoption order would promote Laura’s best interests and whether it is clearly preferable to any other order, I must identify the likely impacts of an adoption order and evaluate any benefits and detriments associated with each alternative: Adoption of NG [2014] NSWSC 680 at [74].

3. [59]

   The Secretary has identified the following alternatives to making an adoption order:

   1. (1)

      maintaining the status quo so that Laura would remain under the parental responsibility of the Minister until she reaches 18 years old;

   2. (2)

      the making of an order allocating parental responsibility to the proposed adoptive parent: s 92 of the Adoption Act; or

   3. (3)

      the making of an order allocating parental responsibility to one or both of the birth parents: s 92 of the Adoption Act.

4. [60]

   An order for adoption is clearly preferable and in Laura’s best interests compared with alternative (1) above. If I were to make no order, Laura would continue as a ward of the State until she reaches 18 years of age. This would mean that Maggie could not make any significant decisions concerning Laura without the approval of the Minister’s delegate. It would also mean that Laura would not be legally recognised as part of Maggie’s family.

5. [61]

   Alternative (2) above would address certain disadvantages associated with taking no steps at all, however this would be an order of temporary effect that would expire when Laura reaches 18 years of age. In the meantime, the Minister and relevant caseworkers would continue their involvement in the decision-making process for Laura. As with alternative (1) above, Laura would lose her legal connection to her psychological family upon reaching 18 years of age.

6. [62]

   Alternative (3) is not realistic or plausible in the present circumstances. The evidence falls significantly short of supporting such an order. As referenced above, the Children’s Court made final care orders in early 2023, allocating all aspects of parent responsibility for Laura to the Minister until she reaches 18 years of age. Further to this, a report was prepared by an authorised clinician for Isla’s application which recommended that Laura remain in Maggie’s care. Restoration of Laura to Isla’s care was not recommended.

7. [63]

   If alternatives (1) or (2) were pursued, such courses would lack the certainty and permanency associated with an adoption order. This would also potentially expose Laura to stigmatisation because she would continue to be a “foster child”, rather than living in a family that is legally recognised as her own.

8. [64]

   In these proceedings, an order for adoption would provide obvious benefits over the available alternatives, including the fact that Laura can be provided with a secure, stable and reliable lifetime placement with Maggie: In re W (A Child) (Adoption: Grandparents’ Competing Claim) [2017] 1 WLR 889; [2016] EWCA Civ 793 at [64]. The identity needs of Laura would also be supported by an order for adoption as, on the evidence before me, she is emotionally, psychologically and residentially a beloved member of Maggie’s family. This would bring Laura’s legal status into conformity with her reality and perfect her sense of permanent belonging in the family which she considers her own, not only throughout childhood but for a lifetime: Adoption of Taylor-Clay [2019] NSWSC 27 at [58].

9. [65]

   I am satisfied that an adoption order is unlikely to have any negative impact on Laura’s future connection with Zara. In the context of open adoption, the sibling bond can be promoted in the absence of a legal relationship and the adoption plan plays a crucial part in maximising the opportunities for such relationships to remain intact: Adoption of JLK and CRK [2017] NSWSC 7 at [92]. The Paternal Adoption Plan, although not signed by Jeremy, contemplates the facilitation of annual visits between Laura and Zara.

10. [66]

    In consideration of all of the available alternatives, I am satisfied that an adoption order is firmly in Laura’s best interests and is the clearly preferable option: s 8(2)(k) of the Adoption Act.

Dispensing with the birth parents’ consent

1. [67]

   Before making an order for adoption, I must address the consent requirements.

2. [68]

   Laura is 6 years old and therefore she is unable to consent to her own adoption: s 55 of the Adoption Act.

3. [69]

   Pursuant to s 52 of the Adoption Act, the Court must not make an adoption order in relation to a child who is under 18 years old unless the requisite consent has been provided. As Laura has not been previously adopted, consent is required from each of the birth parents and the Secretary, as the person who has parental responsibility for Laura: s 52 of the Adoption Act. Consent is not required under s 52 if the requirement for consent has been dispensed with by the Court: s 54(1)(a) of the Adoption Act.

4. [70]

   Formal consent for Laura’s adoption has not been provided by Isla or Jeremy. Accordingly, the Secretary seeks orders to dispense with both birth parents consent pursuant to s 67(1)(d) of the Adoption Act. Both Isla and Jeremy have been provided sufficient notice of the Secretary’s application for adoption orders in relation to Laura: s 88 of the Adoption Act.

5. [71]

   The Court will not readily or quickly dispense with the birth parents consent to the adoption of their child by a proposed adoptive parent in circumstances where the adoption is opposed. It is a serious decision, and it is not to be reached lightly: for example, see Adoption of RCC and RZA at [17].

6. [72]

   Pursuant to s 59 of the Adoption Act, Isla was provided with the mandatory written information in-person by a representative of Barnardos in May 2023. Isla provided a signed acknowledgement of receipt.

7. [73]

   Isla has historically opposed Laura’s adoption. This opposition led to the filing of a s 90 application in the Children’s Court in 2024 for the restoration of Laura to her care. As referenced above, this application was later withdrawn. When the Department advised Isla that Laura was being transferred to Maggie’s care with a view to permanent placement, she was noted as being upset, stating she wanted “to fight for Laura”. The Secretary’s evidence indicates that Isla has expressed that she thought Maggie was “really great for Laura” and when asked about her views on open adoption, she stated that she had a “really good relationship” with Maggie and that she did not have any concerns. I conclude that while Isla clearly holds great love for Laura as her daughter, restoration to her care is not a realistic prospect in the circumstances or in Laura’s best interests.

8. [74]

   Pursuant to s 59 of the Adoption Act, Jeremy was provided with the mandatory written information in-person by a representative of Barnardos in April 2023. Jeremy provided a signed acknowledgement of receipt.

9. [75]

   Although Jeremy has not provided formal consent to Laura’s adoption, he has consistently expressed his gratitude towards Maggie for her care of Laura. The evidence indicates that his key concern is that Laura is happy and well cared for. During a phone call with a representative of Barnardos in 2025, Jeremy stated that he believes “Laura is in a great spot with Maggie and fully supports the adoption”. The evidence also revealed, however, that during another phone call with Barnardos in 2025, Jeremy inquired as to how much time he had if he wanted “to get Laura back” and on another occasion he stated he would eventually like to “go for care one day”. Jeremy does not support the return of Laura to Isla’s care. I conclude that while Jeremy harbours a desire for Laura to be in his care, this is not realistic. I am satisfied that restoration to Jeremy’s care is not in Laura’s best interests.

10. [76]

    I cannot make consent dispense orders unless I am satisfied that to do so would be in the best interests of the child: s 67(2) of the Adoption Act. In accordance with s 67(1)(d), I must also be satisfied that the child has formed a stable relationship with the carer and that the adoption will promote the child’s welfare.

11. [77]

    In considering the evidence before me, it is clear that Laura’s best interests are advanced by the making of consent dispensation orders and that her welfare in both the short and long term will be promoted by her adoption by Maggie. I am also satisfied that Laura and Maggie have formed a strong and stable relationship.

12. [78]

    As a result, I am satisfied that I should dispense with the requirement for Isla and Jeremy’s consent: s 67(1)(d) of the Adoption Act.

Consent by person with parental responsibility

1. [79]

   In April 2025, the Principal Officer, Adoption, Barnardos Out-of-Home-Care NSW provided consent to Laura’s adoption by Maggie. Therefore, as the Delegate, the appropriate consent has been provided from the person who presently holds parental responsibility for Laura. Resultantly, s 52(a)(ii) of the Adoption Act is satisfied.

The Adoption Plan

1. [80]

   The Secretary has prepared adoption plans pursuant to s 46 of the Adoption Act which includes provisions for the means and nature of contact between Laura and her birth family.

2. [81]

   I must address whether these proposed adoption plans are in Laura’s best interests and are proper in the circumstances: s 90(2) of the Adoption Act. The Secretary seeks an order that both adoption plans be registered: s 50(1) and s 50(3) of the Adoption Act.

3. [82]

   The proposed Maternal Adoption Plan contemplates contact arrangements between Laura, Maggie and Isla. It has been signed by Maggie, Isla and the Delegate.

4. [83]

   The plan provides for 9 face-to-face visits annually with each visit lasting at least 2 hours. At least 3 of the face-to-face visits are to include Laura’s extra-curricular activities, events or special occasions. There is also provision for a minimum of 3 video calls annually between Isla and Laura. Maggie will endeavour to encourage and facilitate calls with Isla on her birthday, Laura’s birthday, Easter, Christmas and Mother’s Day, subject to Laura’s needs and wishes. Maggie will also provide photographs of Laura to Isla at least 3 times per year. The plan also provides scope for additional contact visits, subject to Laura’s needs and wishes. If Isla does not attend a scheduled contact visit, that visit will be forfeited.

5. [84]

   Although Isla has not provided formal consent to Laura’s adoption, she has agreed to and signed the proposed Maternal Adoption Plan: s 46(2A) of the Adoption Act.

6. [85]

   The proposed Paternal Adoption Plan contemplates contact arrangements between Laura, Maggie, Jeremy and Zara. It was signed by Maggie and the Delegate.

7. [86]

   Jeremy has not signed the proposed Paternal Adoption Plan. The evidence indicates that Jeremy was provided with the plan and that unsuccessful attempts were made on 4 separate occasions to discuss its contents. During a call with a Barnardos Case Manager in October 2025, Jeremy said that he had expected to have 12 face-to-face visits with Laura annually.

8. [87]

   The plan provides for 9 face-to-face visits annually with each visit lasting at least 2 hours. At least 3 of the face-to-face visits are to include Laura’s extra-curricular activities, events or special occasions. There is also provision for a minimum of 3 video calls annually between Jeremy and Laura. Maggie will endeavour to encourage and facilitate calls with Jeremy on his birthday, Laura’s birthday, Easter, Christmas and Father’s Day, subject to Laura’s needs and wishes. Maggie will also provide photographs of Laura to Jeremy at least 3 times per year. The plan also provides scope for additional contact visits, subject to Laura’s needs and wishes. If Jeremy does not attend a scheduled contact visit, that visit will be forfeited.

9. [88]

   The plan also includes provision for contact between Laura and Zara. Maggie will use her best endeavours to facilitate visits with Zara once a year on dates to be agreed between Maggie and Zara’s carer. The visits are to last for at least 2 hours, with the possibility of this being extended by mutual agreement.

10. [89]

    I am satisfied that the proposed adoption plans are in Laura’s best interests and proper in the circumstances. In reaching this decision, I have had regard to Laura’s relationship with her birth family, in conjunction with her emotional needs and sense of personal, familial and cultural identity: s 8(2) of the Adoption Act. Both proposed adoption plans place Laura’s needs as paramount and facilitate continued contact with her birth family.

11. [90]

    I am satisfied that the proposed Maternal Adoption Plan should be registered.

12. [91]

    I am also satisfied that the proposed Paternal Adoption Plan should also be registered even though Jeremy has not signed it. In accordance with s 50(1) of the Adoption Act, the “parties” to an adoption who have agreed to an adoption plan may apply to the Court for registration of the plan. The “parties” to an adoption are defined under the Adoption Act, and they do not include a birth parent who has not consented to the child’s adoption. It follows that the fact that Jeremy has not signed the proposed Paternal Adoption Plan is not an impediment to its registration: s 50(3) of the Adoption Act.

Proposed name change

1. [92]

   The Secretary seeks an order pursuant to s 101(1) of the Adoption Act for the approval of the proposed name change.

2. [93]

   Before changing the name of a child, I must consider any wishes expressed by the child and any other factors that I deem relevant: s 101(2). As Laura is under 12 years old, consent to change her name is not required: s 101(4).

3. [94]

   Jeremy has stated that he is content with the proposed name change as long as his surname remains. The Secretary’s proposed name change for Laura retains Jeremy’s surname as a second middle name, according with Jeremy’s wishes.

4. [95]

   In relation to the surname change to Maggie’s surname, Isla historically expressed discontent, stating that she did not support Laura “having someone else’s surname”. However, later evidence indicates that she is satisfied with the proposed name change, on the condition that she can retain Laura’s original birth certificate.

5. [96]

   There is no evidence that Laura wishes to alter her first name. She has been identified as “Laura” since birth and it is crucial that she retains this name as it is an important part of her personal identity. Laura’s name will honour and preserve her ongoing connection with her birth family which can never be erased, regardless of whether orders for adoption are made.

Conclusion

1. [97]

   The orders sought by the Secretary in the summons are in Laura’s best interests. I will grant the relief in the summons.

2. [98]

   I understand that Laura and Maggie seek an adoption ceremony for the making of the final orders. A ceremony will provide the opportunity for Laura and her family to recognise the significance of the occasion and celebrate it. I will make orders on that occasion.

3. [99]

   Once the orders are made, an Integrated Birth Certificate will be issued which will reference the details of Laura’s birth mother, Isla. It will serve as a pivotal part of Laura’s life story. Maggie has requested the Integrated Birth Certificate to reflect her occupation as at the time of Laura’s birth. This will be accommodated.