 |
Nappies is for consultation
Who is parenting and how
And baby makes three (or four, or five, or two)
How the laws affect our lives
Current recognition avenues
Recognition Options for the future
What we favour and why
We recommend
Nappies Consultation:
Expression of Interest
MAJOR REPORT - OCTOBER 2002 |
 
|
And then… the brides changed nappies
What we favour and why
None of the options we have outlined are perfect, and none of them covers everyone. We support a mixed use of several of them, in conjunction, to provide coverage that it as broad and simple as possible, while still permitting choice.
In
The
Bride Wore Pink we identified two major issues, the recognition
of partner relationships and the recognition of a broader range of interdependent
relationship outside of couples. We decided to pursue both of those goals
as distinct but related issues, and recommended widespread immediate recognition
of partner “de-facto” relationships with a more limited and
slower recognition of a broader range of other “domestic”
relationships. This was on the basis that there was a clear need for,
and clear community support for, partner recognition, in addition to clear
inequality with heterosexual partner relationships, and a relatively simple
series of reforms that could be pursued. The need for wide recognition
of non-partner relationships was less clear, as was the impact of any
proposed changes, so we recommended some immediate reforms (many of which
have happened) accompanied by an inquiry into what else was needed (currently
under way).
Then, as now, we are conscious of a desire not to reinforce traditional hetero-nuclear (or homo-nuclear!) family structures and to respect our community’s extended family networks. We again recommend a two-pronged approach to parenting reform, separating out issues that require clear and immediate change from those that require more complex inquiry.
Issues relating to co-parent and step-parent recognition are clear, have widespread support, represent a large proportion of families, and can be argued on the basis of formal equality with heterosexual families. We urge immediate reforms in these areas. These reforms proceed on the basis of the current legal framework of two legal parents.
Issues relating to the recognition of donor-dads as legal parents in addition to mothers, or the full legal recognition of multi-parent families – two mothers and two fathers - are more complex and uncertain. Multi-parent recognition cannot be assimilated into the current legal framework which uses a two-parent model. Multi-parent recognition would also have uncertain legal effects. So, for instance, removing the provision that deems donors not to be parents would have effects on all families where children are born through DI, not just on lesbian and gay families (even assuming it only covered known and not anonymous donors). It would also create three legal parents (assuming that the co-mother was already recognised) in a legal framework that until now has only ever accommodated a maximum of two.
It is clear that contact with children is a major issue for donor-dads, and that there is a need to provide certainty in relation to contact and residence issues. We support immediate changes to provide certainty in this area. However it is very unclear what other areas need change. For example, if two primary parents are able to obtain child support from one another, is there really a need to extend liability to include third or fourth parents?
We therefore support a further process of detailed consideration on how multi-family recognition could occur if it is needed across a broad range of laws.