NEW MARRIAGE LAWS

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21324, 17 November 1934, Page 16

NEW MARRIAGE LAWS

SUGGESTION VIGOROUSLY OPPOSED OPINIONS OF CLERGY AND DOCTORS Decided opinions are held by leading Christchurch doctors and clergy on the suggested legislation requiring certificates of fitness for marriage, which was before the British House of Lords this week. The proposal was vigorously opposed by clergy and docto"s who commented on it last evening, chiefly on the grounds that such legislation would place far too great a responsibility and power with a section of the community, that it could not achieve its ideal, and that marriage was not simply a matter of physical fitness.

Lord Kilmaine, in the House of Lords on Wednesday, moved that the House favour an amendment to the marriage laws to make it obligatory for both parties to a proposed marriage to produce medical certificates of fitness. The motion was later withdrawn, the House considering that the first step should come from the public. Heavy Responsibility "Such legislation will never be made," declared a leading Christchurch doctor. "No doctor should or would like to take the responsibility it would place upon him. In any case the majority of defective children are born of apparently healthy parents and any legislation introduced would not eliminate mental defectives." He vigorously opposed the idea that doctocs should be given such a responsibility; he could not agree that it was right, and he asked what doctor would accept it. The British Medical Association had appointed a commission to investigate the subject and it had decided to take no action because such a small percentage of the mental defectives would be Eliminated. There would be a lot of opposition to such legislation, he considered. In some cases it would be a very useful thing, but certainly doctors would not; be anxious to take the task upon themselves. Dangerous Power Dean Julius considered that there would be a great risk in putting such power in the hands of a certain section of the community. It was a power which might be dangerous and might be misused. There were cases in which legislation was desirable, but he did not think any section of the community would agree to a proposal for legislation governing every marriage. In England the clergy would be more affected than in New Zealand because they were bound to conduct a marriage when requested, providing it was within the present laws. Here in New Zealand the clergy could refuse to perform a marriage if they wished, although the parties could always go to a registry office. He did not think it would'be the duty of the clergy to take on such a work as the proposed legislation might place upon them. There had been cases where clergy had refused to marry certain persons, but it was always because of known disabilities—mental and the like. The provisions of such legislation would have to be very carefully safeguarded, Dean Julius said. If such power were given to a doctor he might quite conceivably prevent a personal enemy from marrying. He did'not think Parliament would ever pass such a law. "Big Margin for Error" Dr. L. C. Averill said, " I suppose it is an ideal, but I do not see how it could be carried out, at least by. British communities. It is a rather delicate matter and the proposals are hardly practicable, because there would be such a big margin for error on the part of doctors. Human nature being as it is I do not think such legislation would be accepted." He considered that means of preventing persons definitely defective or insane from marrying would be well worth considering; but only in gross cases could legislation bo practicable. The Rev. A. C. Watson said that this was one of the proposals which met with instant approval from the social reformer, whose mind was influenced by doctrinnaire condderations, but it was full of practical difficulties. The dividing line between fitness and unfitness for marriage was difficult to determine and it would be a bold man, even though highly qualified to speak with medical knowledge, who would draw that line. Mr Watson had no doubt that Lord Kilmaine's proposals would come up again, but it was certainly unlikely that public opinion would favour them, at least within the present generation. Ideals of Marriage "Married life consists of something more than being physically fit," said the Rev. D. Gardner Miller. Married life is not only for the issue of children; a childless marriage need not be an unhappy one."

His experience had taught him, Mr Miller said, that before entering the married state, young people especially should be properly instructed into the mysteries of it. In any well regulated state he thought that would become a necessity. Much of the information that had been obtained had been secured in questionable ways. Marriage of people who were obviously diseased very seldom took place nowadays. The general standard of education had been so lifted that abnormalities of that naturo seldom occurred. The Rev. E. Drake said he thought it a very difficult subject to handle, and the authorities would have to guard the situation very carefully. He agreed with the opinion that the responsibility of doctors and clergy would be too great. If an embargo were put on marriage in this way other unpleasant things might happen. In the opinion of the Rev. L. A. North marriage is so much an individual matter that intervention by a third party would be too great a responsibility. He said he did not - 555?- the medical and clerical professions would accept the responstd Nation would