Key Takeaways
- A New Zealand woman who was investigated in 2017 for alleged people‑trafficking later adopted 21 overseas children (11 of whom were already known to Immigration New Zealand).
- Immigration officials raised concerns that she controlled every aspect of the children’s lives, including their finances, and noted the unusually high number of adoptions relative to her household size and income.
- Under current law, legal adoptions that satisfy Samoa’s adoption rules (section 17 of the Adoption Act) automatically meet New Zealand immigration requirements, with no mandatory suitability assessment by child‑welfare agencies and no limit on how many adopted children a sponsor can support.
- Similar concerns emerged in cases involving Kiribati nationals: one woman with nine adopted children applying for a partnership visa lives in a two‑bedroom flat, and another Kiribati woman submitted nine visa applications for adopted children within four months.
- In response, the government placed a temporary halt on recognising certain international adoptions for immigration and citizenship purposes in September 2023 and introduced a bill to Parliament in May 2024 to make the restrictions permanent.
- The proposed legislation creates two pathways for overseas‑adopted children to acquire New Zealand citizenship automatically: via the Hague Convention process or through a Family Court order, thereby adding oversight where it previously lacked.
Background of the Case
A woman originally investigated by New Zealand Police in 2017 for alleged people‑trafficking went on to adopt a total of 21 young people from overseas. Eleven of those adoptions were already known to Immigration New Zealand (INZ) at the time of the police interview. Although the police concluded that the evidence did not meet the legal threshold for people‑trafficking, the interview highlighted serious worries about the extent of control the adoptive mother exercised over the children’s daily lives, including their earnings and personal decisions.
Details of the Police Investigation and Ongoing Concerns
During the 2017 interview, officers noted that the adoptive mother appeared to dictate all financial matters for the adopted children, requiring them to hand over any earnings they received. This pattern of control raised red flags about potential exploitation, even though the investigators could not substantiate a trafficking charge. INZ subsequently flagged the case because the woman had become the sponsor for an exceptionally large number of adopted children relative to her own household composition and financial capacity.
Immigration New Zealand’s Concerns About Volume
INZ expressed specific alarm that the woman was supporting her 21st adopted child in addition to five biological children, creating a household of 26 dependents. The agency questioned whether a single income could realistically provide for such a large family, especially given the lack of any formal assessment of the sponsor’s ability to meet the children’s needs. The situation underscored a gap in the immigration system: while the adoptions themselves were lawful under Samoan law, the sheer scale prompted questions about child welfare and the adequacy of existing safeguards.
Legal Framework and Lack of Suitability Checks
Under section 17 of New Zealand’s Adoption Act, an overseas adoption that complies with the child’s country of origin is automatically recognised for immigration and citizenship purposes. Samoan law permits adoption of children up to age 20, and the woman’s adoptions satisfied this requirement. Importantly, the legislation does not mandate a suitability assessment by child‑welfare or protection agencies before an overseas adoption is accepted for immigration purposes, nor does it impose any numeric ceiling on how many adopted children a sponsor may support. This regulatory void allowed the case‑workers to approve the applications despite evident concerns about the children’s living conditions.
Case of the Kiribati Woman with Nine Adopted Children
A separate briefing highlighted a 39‑year‑old woman from Kiribati who was applying for a partnership resident visa while caring for nine adopted children. During her interview, officials observed that the couple intended to support an 11‑person household on a single income while residing in a two‑bedroom flat. Although the woman met the partnership visa criteria and the adoptions were legally valid under Kiribati law, the lack of planning for housing, education, and financial stability prompted officials to flag the case for further discussion with the Kiribati judiciary regarding oversight of intercountry adoptions.
Likelihood of Visa Approval Despite Concerns
Immigration New Zealand concluded that, because the Kiribati woman satisfied the formal partnership resident instructions and the adoptions complied with local law, her residence application was likely to be approved. The agency noted that the current immigration framework does not permit refusal solely on the basis of potential welfare risks when the legal adoption requirements are met. Consequently, officials agreed to engage with Kiribati authorities to address broader systemic issues rather than deny the visa on individual grounds.
Additional Briefings: Multiple Visa Applications from a Kiribati Sponsor
Another set of briefings revealed nine visa applications submitted within a four‑month window for children or young people adopted by a 40‑year‑old Kiribati woman. In her interview, she explained that some of the applicants were biologically related to her or her partner (albeit distant relatives), while others were children of family friends with no biological tie. She stated that all nine would live with her, her partner, and her four biological children in a six‑bedroom home, and that she intended to support them until they could become self‑sufficient. Despite the large blended family, the applications proceeded through the standard processing channels because each adoption satisfied the relevant legal criteria.
Government Response: Temporary Halt and Proposed Legislation
In light of these patterns, the government imposed a temporary halt in September 2023 on recognising certain international adoptions for immigration and citizenship purposes. In May 2024, Associate Justice Minister Nicole McKee introduced a bill to Parliament aimed at making the halt permanent. The bill seeks to tighten the oversight framework by requiring that any overseas adoption used to confer New Zealand residency or citizenship either follow the Hague Convention process or be approved by a New Zealand Family Court. This dual‑pathway approach is intended to add a layer of scrutiny that was previously absent when adoptions met only the origin country’s legal standards.
Statement from Associate Justice Minister Nicole McKee
Minister McKee explained that the reforms will clarify the circumstances under which overseas adoptions are accepted for automatic citizenship. “The reforms to the system will mean there are two pathways for children adopted overseas by New Zealand citizens to automatically become New Zealand citizens, either under the process in the Hague Convention, or in the New Zealand Family Court,” she said. By mandating Family Court review for non‑Hague adoptions, the government aims to prevent situations where sponsors with large numbers of adopted children—potentially lacking adequate resources or oversight—can circumvent child‑welfare protections.
Conclusion and Implications
The series of cases involving a single New Zealand sponsor with 21 overseas adoptions, coupled with multiple Kiribati‑based examples, exposed significant weaknesses in the current immigration‑adoption interface. While each adoption was technically lawful under the respective foreign jurisdictions, the sheer volume of dependents, limited financial means, and absence of mandatory suitability assessments raised legitimate child‑welfare concerns. The proposed legislative changes, introducing a mandatory Family Court route for non‑Hague adoptions, represent a direct attempt to close those gaps. If enacted, the reforms should provide stronger safeguards against potential exploitation while preserving legitimate pathways for intercountry adoption, ultimately aiming to protect the best interests of children seeking to join families in New Zealand.