Adoption Rights For Queer Couples Denied: The Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriages in India has generated intense debate on the adoption rights of unmarried and queer couples. Chief Justice Chandrachud emphasized non-discrimination while a majority upheld adoption rights, but a minority perspective suggested otherwise. This decision significantly impacts LGBTQ+ rights and adoption laws.
Adoption Rights For Queer Couples Denied: Supreme Court Said That legalizing same-sex marriages should be left to the legislature and not mandated by the judiciary.
Adoption Rights For Queer Couples Denied: Supreme Court directed the government to establish a committee to address practical concerns of same-sex couples.
New Delhi,17 October(City Times): Adoption Rights For Queer Couples Denied: The recent Supreme Court judgment on same-sex marriages in India held the promise of extending adoption rights to unmarried and queer couples. However, this hope was short-lived, as three of the five judges on the bench dissented from Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice SK Kaul’s views on the matter.
In a landmark ruling on same-sex marriages, the Supreme Court has ignited a debate regarding the adoption rights of unmarried and queer couples. Here, we delve into the details of the decision, the perspectives of the justices, and the implications for LGBTQ+ rights and adoption laws in India.
The Bench’s Varied Degrees of Agreement
As Chief Justice DY Chandrachud began reading out the judgment, he emphasized that the five-judge bench held both agreements and disagreements on the issue of same-sex marriages. The agreement was evident in the belief that legalizing same-sex marriages should be left to the legislature and not mandated by the judiciary. They also directed the government to establish a committee to address practical concerns of same-sex couples.
The Debate on Unmarried and Queer Couples’ Adoption Rights
However, a significant disagreement emerged regarding the adoption rights of unmarried and queer couples, a topic that has far-reaching consequences. Advocate J. Sai Deepak, who represents respondent Bharatiya Stree Shakti in the Supreme Court decision on same-sex marriage, suggests that the Government may address operational issues without changing the Special Marriage Act. This approach could recognize civil unions with distinct rights, particularly for adoption, with consideration for child health experts. A parliamentary committee may be formed to explore these options.
What did Legal expert Karuna Nundy said on this development
Legal expert Karuna Nundy highlights that although certain opportunities for legal changes were discussed today, decisions about marriage have been deferred to the lawmakers. The central government’s stance on marriage is clear, but they are hopeful that a committee will recognize civil unions and related rights. Nundy also emphasizes the role of state governments in enacting legislation to protect the rights of LGBTQ+ individuals, particularly in areas like healthcare and employment non-discrimination. The unanimous sentiment is that the rights of queer citizens must be safeguarded, with states having the ability to enact these protections.
Chief Justice’s Stance on Non-Discrimination
Justice Chandrachud firmly asserted that barring unmarried and queer couples from adopting children on the basis of sexual orientation constitutes discrimination. He argued that the law should not presume that only heterosexual couples can provide a stable and nurturing environment for a child.
CARA Guidelines Under Scrutiny
Justice Chandrachud also critiqued the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) guidelines, contending that they unlawfully prevent unmarried couples from adopting. This, he argued, contravenes the best interests of the child. According to him, these guidelines indirectly discriminate against non-traditional unions, further perpetuating discrimination against the queer community.
A Majority Perspective on Adoption Rights
In contrast, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul aligned with the Chief Justice’s position on adoption. However, Justice Chandrachud disagreed with Justice S Ravindra Bhat’s judgment, asserting that Justice Bhat’s directives failed to address the plight of the queer community.
Emphasizing Equal Opportunities for All
The majority view, supported by Justices Hima Kohli and PS Narasimha, expressed concerns but ultimately supported the right of queer couples to adopt. They emphasized the importance of exploring all avenues to provide stable homes for children in need, even if it means considering unmarried or non-heterosexual couples as potential caregivers.
A Minority Perspective on Adoption Rights
Justice Bhat maintained that CARA’s Regulation 5(3) should not be deemed unconstitutional, and his perspective offers an alternative viewpoint that reinforces the idea that unmarried or non-heterosexual couples can also provide loving and stable homes for children in need.
The Supreme Court’s ruling has significant implications for the LGBTQ+ community and adoption laws in India, as it raises important questions about equality and non-discrimination. It reflects a broader global conversation surrounding the rights of same-sex couples and their ability to adopt and provide loving homes for children.
