Update on ‘the Shatter Bill’
[i.e. the Revised General Scheme of the Children and Family
Relationships Bill 2014]
–– it will serve neither
children nor mothers
· The definition of ‘parent’ in this revised General Scheme ignores the fact that the
Family according to Article 41.1.1° of the Constitution of Ireland has ‘inalienable and imprescriptible
rights, antecedent and superior to all positive law’; and ignores the definition of ‘family’ given by Mrs
Justice Susan Denham in McD. –v- L & anor (2009), point 62, where she says
‘Therefore arising from the Terms of the Constitution, “family” means a family
based on marriage of a man and a woman.’ The revised General Scheme implies
that biological parents can transfer such rights to commissioning couples, for
example, in cases of surrogacy. It also directs that in the case of Assisted
Human Reproduction ‘conception’ is to be read as ‘implantation’. That ignores
the legal reality that the State already accepts the validity of the DNA test,
a test based on the scientific fact that the individual human being begins life
at fertilization [see the Criminal Justice (Forensic Evidence and DNA
Database System) Act 2014]. If the validity of the DNA test is to be undermined
in that way, it will have serious knock-on effects in regard to forensic evidence
in cases of criminal law to do with murder, rape, robbery, and sundry other
crimes.
[Part 1, Head 2:
Interpretation (1), (2)]
· The revised General Scheme would
discriminate between the biological father and the biological mother by
persisting in the contested principle that the woman who gives birth is the
legal mother. [Part 3: Head 10, (3), (4)]
· The revised General Scheme pre-empts the
judgement of the Supreme Court on the appeal by the Government against the
Abbott judgement [The High Court, March 5, 2013]. The Abbott judgement
acknowledges the right of the genetic mother to be recognized as the legal
mother. [Part 2, Parentage and
Presumption of Paternity, Head 5: Parentage (2)]
· The revised General Scheme, by allowing
adoption and custody of children by non-marital couples, cohabiting couples,
not excluding same-sex couples, disregards its own stated principle of ‘Best interests of the child’ by
ignoring the evidence that children living in the care of such couples, are 8
times more likely to be harmed than children living with married biological
parents [Abuse, Neglect, Adoption and
Foster Care Research, National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect (NIS-4),
2004-2009, March 2010, (Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation)]; and are
50 times more likely to die of injuries, than children residing with two
biological parents [P. G. Schnitzer, ‘Child death resulting from
inflicted injuries: household risk factors and perpetrator chararcteristics’, Pediatrics 116 (2005) 687-93.] [Part 3, Head 10: Parentage in cases
of assisted reproduction using eggs, sperm or in vitro embryos provided by donors; Part 7, Head 37 Best interests
of the child]
· The revised General Scheme is an attempt to
legislate, by the back door, for Assisted Human Reproduction including In Vitro Fertilization [IVF]. IVF, as
ordinarily practised, relies on the foreseen wastage of 96% of human embryos
conceived in vitro [i.e. ‘on glass’]. When more
than 1 embryo is implanted in a woman, and when that woman is
somewhat older, she is advised to have at least one of the extra embryos aborted,
as it is claimed that the procedure poses a risk to her health and her life. A recent
Chinese study has confirmed the strong link between abortion and breast cancer
[‘A meta-analysis of the association between induced abortion and breast
cancer risk among Chinese females’, Cancer
Causes Control, November 24, 2013]. [Part
4 Safeguards to Preserve the Child’s Identity in Cases of Assisted
Reproduction Using Donor Gametes, Head
12, (2), (3)]
Issued by the Alliance for the Defence of
the Family and Marriage [ADFAM]
www.adfam.ie
