Children must be told they're adopted in Estonia's new Family Law Act
A draft Family Law Act would require adoptive families to inform children of their adoption and would grant children the right to obtain information about their biological parents without the latter's consent.
The Ministry of Justice has completed a draft amendment to the Family Law Act which would clarify adoption confidentiality provisions by requiring adoptive parents to inform children that they were adopted. The amendment would also give adoptees the right to obtain identifying information about their biological parents regardless of whether the latter consent.
Under the current system, children only learn they were adopted if their adoptive parents decide to tell them. The aim of the amendment is to strengthen children's rights and make the system more transparent based on the principle that a child's interest in knowing their origins outweighs a biological parent's wish to remain anonymous.
"More open regulation reduces stigmatization, supports the child's psychological sense of security and helps prevent later identity crises," the explanatory memorandum accompanying the draft states.
The document also notes that, unlike the earlier view that ignorance protects the child, the current understanding is that a child has the right, stemming from self-determination, to know about their adoption, allowing them to develop a self-image based on actual facts. The Social Insurance Board's (SKA) current practice already supports this understanding.
The draft does not specify the age at which children must be told they were adopted, leaving the decision to adoptive parents.
Adults who suspect they may have been adopted would also be able to verify this through the Social Insurance Board. If an adult adoptee contacts the SKA seeking information about their adoption, the agency would provide all data collected before the adoption, including information about the person's former name, native language, personality traits, habits and preferences, appearance, previous time spent in care and where that care took place, as well as photographs and the names, personal identification codes and contact details of their biological parents.
"The draft therefore does not provide for notification initiated by the state itself, but rather grants adoptees the right to request information on their own initiative. This solution ensures adoptees' right to know their origins while at the same time avoiding unjustified state interference in family private life," the explanatory memorandum says.
The number of adoptions has fallen significantly. While 50-60 children a year were adopted into new families in 2012–2013, the figure dropped to 21–26 in 2023–2024. One reason cited in the explanatory memorandum is the outdated adoption framework, which it says harms the rights of adopted children.
Current laws do not allow adoptees to be connected with their siblings even in adulthood unless adoptive parents consent. At the same time, the number of adult adoptees contacting the SKA for such information has increased in recent years.
"One of the problems is that, in practice, the current adoption confidentiality rules are interpreted very conservatively and rigidly, even though the provisions do not explicitly prohibit adoptive parents from disclosing the fact of adoption to the child," the explanatory memorandum states.
The legislative amendment would also give biological siblings the right to request information about an adoptee, though in such cases access to the information would depend on the consent of the adoptee or, in the case of a minor adoptee, their adoptive parents.
Reluctant party to cover divorce legal fees
The amendment to the Family Law Act would also introduce changes to divorce proceedings. Spouses would be required to do everything possible to dissolve a marriage by agreement and avoid going to court, thereby reducing the workload of the courts.
"This means that if one spouse files for divorce in court, they must present the circumstances to the court and demonstrate how they attempted to dissolve the marriage out of court before turning to the courts and why this was unsuccessful for reasons beyond their control," the explanatory memorandum states.
Such reasons may include, for example, the other spouse fundamentally refusing to agree to the divorce or the inability to determine the other spouse's whereabouts.
If an out-of-court divorce proves impossible, the court would still ultimately dissolve the marriage. However, amendments to the Family Law Act and the Code of Civil Procedure would simplify court proceedings in divorce cases by removing the obligation to reconcile the parties and hear them in person.
An additional aim is to distribute legal costs more fairly, so that they would no longer generally remain the responsibility of each party individually. Instead, costs would be borne by the party who obstructed out-of-court divorce proceedings. A separate draft bill also plans to increase the state fee for divorce proceedings.
In divorce and child support cases involving minors, the law would explicitly state that the legal costs of the opposing party in maintenance disputes cannot be imposed on a minor child.
The law would also be supplemented with the principle that when establishing paternity, the court would simultaneously decide custody issues if requested by a parent. This would eliminate the need to initiate separate proceedings on custody after paternity has been established.
Child support to be calculated automatically
The rules governing child support payments would also change, as child support disputes in court are lengthy, exhausting for children and expensive for parents. According to the explanatory memorandum, child support calculations could be automated on the basis of data and formulas, with the court's role limited to assessing whether the proposed amount and the underlying data are correct.
Because the principles governing custody arrangements are not sufficiently aligned with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, the law would be amended to state that when terminating joint custody and awarding custody to one parent, the court must primarily consider the best interests of the child. This includes taking into account each parent's previous commitment to caring for the child, as well as their willingness to communicate with one another and prioritize the child's interests.
"The aim of this amendment is to ensure that, for example, a child's grandparents would also be able to seek more specific solutions in court regarding visitation arrangements," the explanatory memorandum explains.
The regulation governing transactions made on behalf of a child using the child's assets and the requirement for prior court approval would also be modernized. The draft explains that investment culture has developed in society and that it is therefore no longer practical to require parents to seek separate court approval.
The term of guardianship would be extended from five years to seven years because the number of adults under guardianship has increased significantly over the past decade, increasing the procedural burden and resources required for such cases. The amendment means that frequent reassessments would no longer be necessary when a person's condition is permanent, progressive or unchanged.
The Ministry of Justice is now seeking feedback on the draft from relevant institutions, with the deadline for submissions set for the end of next workweek. Under the current plan, the law would enter into force at the beginning of next year, with some provisions taking effect in the middle of the year.
--
Editor: Karin Koppel, Marcus Turovski
