Page 1733 - Week 06 - Thursday, 19 May 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The exposure draft legislation required the Director of Family Services to furnish the Registrar-General with the correct details of a child found to have been born as the result of a substitute parent agreement. It was proposed to amend the Registration of Births, Deaths and Marriages Act 1963 to provide for this. We were not comfortable with this proposed provision and, after consultation with the Registrar-General and the Director of Family Services, were satisfied that the preferred way of dealing with this issue was to amend the Children's Services Act 1987.
The wording was changed to remove the possibility that commissioning parents would be registered as those who were to be taken as the parents of the child. The intention of this legislation is that the birth certificate of a child is to contain the correct details as to the legal parentage of a child. Only one set of parents is to be entered in the register, and that is the parents as decreed by law. Normally, the birth mother is deemed to be the legal mother of the child and her legal or de facto spouse is deemed to be the father.
The Substitute Parent Agreements (Consequential Amendments) Bill provides for the withdrawal of licences or approval to practise reproductive medicine from medical organisations which participate in facilitating substitute parent agreements. There was no objection to this provision, and it has been retained as is. Amendments to the various registration Acts for health professionals appeared in the exposure draft Surrogacy Agreements (Consequential Amendments) Bill in clauses 3 to 7 and clause 10. These provisions made giving or offering to give advice or services to facilitate substitute agreements professional misconduct by those registered under the Acts. We have removed these provisions from the Substitute Parent Agreements (Consequential Amendments) Bill, as a result of consultation.
Responses from several bodies, including the Law Society and the joint registration boards, argued that the proposed provisions in these registration Acts were not appropriate. The registration boards pointed out that there is an ongoing process of amending the registration Acts, which involves deleting references to professional misconduct. The new approach will nominate specific matters that will attract disciplinary action, including improper or unethical conduct, so the registration boards are able to take action in appropriate cases. We are satisfied that this approach will have the advantage of applying to all health professionals, leaving the ultimate question of improper or unethical conduct to the boards, who argue that it is their responsibility anyway, acceptance by the boards and health professionals, and consistency with other States.
We think we have taken a balanced and sensible approach to substitute parent agreements that considers the rights of all parties involved and properly discharges the Government's and the state's responsibilities in respect of children. I present the explanatory memorandum to the Bill.
Debate (on motion by Mrs Carnell) adjourned.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .