Limitation of the Principle of Publicity in Child Adoption Cases

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

The article analyzes the advisability of limiting the principle of publicity in the consideration of civil cases regarding child adoption. The substantial reasons for this are as follows. First, the need to protect the interests of the adoptive parents who make the difficult decision to accept a child into the family in the hope that the child will consider them as his parents through which they can build a communication with him and his upbringing. Second, the need to protect the interests of children whose full upbringing and development are possible if they are convinced that they are growing up in their home family. Third, the need to protect the interests of biological parents who may not wish to publicize that they were forced to transfer their children for adoption and many other reasons. Meanwhile, the interest of society to access information about this category is also noted by scientists specializing in various fields of knowledge, lawyers, sociologists teachers, psychologists, and potential adoptive parents who wish to further understand what child adoption entails in their future and the experience of recognized members of society regarding child adoption. Thus, a procedural rule guaranteeing the secrecy of child adoption is formulated as follows: “the court is obliged to hold a closed court hearing if there is an application for this by the adoptive parents”.

About the authors

Olga N. Shemeneva

Voronezh State University

Author for correspondence.
Email: shon_in_law@mail.ru
SPIN-code: 2302-2007

Doctor of Law, Associate Professor, Department of Civil Law and Process

Russian Federation, 394019, Voronezh, Universitetskaya square, 1

References

  1. Zubareva OG. Taina usynovleniya: voprosy regulirovaniya i pravoprimeneniya. Zakony Rossii: opyt, analiz, praktika. 2016;(8): 11–13. (In Russ.).
  2. Trofimova GA. Nravstvennoye nevezhestvo kak osnova gosudarstvenoy deviantnoy deyatelnosti. Konstitutsionnoe i munitsipalnoye pravo. 2020;(12):47–54. (In Russ.).
  3. Kamyshansky VP. Ogranicheniya prava sobstvennosti (grazhdansko-pravavoy analiz): аvtoref.d-ra urid. nauk. Saint-Petersburg, 2000. 50 p. (In Russ.).

Copyright (c) 2022 Shemeneva O.N.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies