EQUAL RIGHTS IN LAW FOR ALL CHILDREN

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 31935, 12 March 1969, Page 2

EQUAL RIGHTS IN LAW FOR ALL CHILDREN

Critics of the Status of Children Bill, which seeks to abolish the legal status of illegitimacy, contended the bill was unrealistic and that legislation could not alter the circumstances of a child’s birth, Miss P. M. Webb, an advisory officer of the Justice Department, said in Christchurch.

“But the bill is concerned only with the legal consequences of i the child’s birth and 'with giving all children equal rights,” sail 1 Miss Webb in an address to i the Christchurch East Combined Church Women’s Group on the family law legislation—five bills introduced into Parliament last year.

“The present law stemmed from an attempt to ignore the facts. The basis of legal disabilities of the illegitimate child is that originally in law it was not regarded as having any parents at all. Now legally it has a mother, but only to a very limited extent a father,” she said. The new bill—still with the Statutes Revision Committee —ruled that the relationship of the child to the parents be determined without regard to whether the parties were married.

The Guardianship Act, which would come into force on January 1, next year, gave the father of an illegitimate child equal standing with the mother in matters of custody and guardianship, when the parents were living together.

The new Status of Children Bill did not solve the problem of how the father of an illegitimate child could be identified if he was not prepared to admit paternity, and did not deal with the urgent problem of maintenance. The old Destitute Persons Act provided for the making of a paternity order, in or after which, an order for maintenance could be made. Two important additions were incorporated in the new Domestic Proceedings Act—provision for ordering of genetic tests, and for the mother’s maintenance.

‘•The provision for genetie tests is interesting. They are mainly blood tests now, but the word genetic has been used because other tests, including saliva tests, are becoming available. “Until now blood tests have shown conclusively only that the party is not the father of the child. If the man is the parent a positive conclusion of this can be reached in 70 per cent of cases with the variety of tests now available. Proof Value “Even in other cases it is often possible to show a high enough probability to have considerable proof value in conjunction with other evidence. This does not mean the defendant is automatically judged the father if tests are inconclusive but a high probability could be the deciding factor,” Miss Webb said. Tests could also be ordered for the defendant’s witnesses. This dealt with the problem of the man who brought friends into court who would swear they had had relations with the woman about the time the child was conceived. If the tests showed they could not be the father, their evidence would be discounted. Provisions were also made to ensure that the tests were taken by all parties.

An order for the mother’s maintenance during pregnancy and until the child turned five, if she was unable to support herself because

she was caring for the child, was an important addition to these provisions. Other maintenance provisions were also based on the attitude that if the mother was giving the children fulltime care she was entitled to look to the father for support The same approach appeared in the Matrimonial Property Act where the wife’s contribution to marriage in the form of care of the home and family was • regarded as entitling her to a share in the property which the husband had acquired in the course of earning the family income.

A Partnership Marriage was now regarded as a partnership in which the differing contributions of each partner entitled an equal return. The changing attitude to the wife’s maintenance was very apparent in regard to her conduct. Formerly this had been very important in assessing maintenance but now her needs were emphasised. Maintenance was not a reward for good conduct or a penalty for bad conduct, but simply her share of the family income.

If the wife’s acceptance of the responsibility of bringing up children had affected her ability to look after herself, she was entitled to the husband’s support after the children grew up. But where the wife had had no responsibility and her earning capacity had not been affected by past responsibilities the husband’s obligation to maintain her ceased. This applied particularly to young couples who had no children and had separated after a few years of marriage. “Many people feel wives who have brought up families are to be thrown on the scrap-heap. This is not so. A woman who has given a substantial part of her life to care for the home and children will not be left to fend for herself when the marriage breaks up and the children no longer need care. “But a woman with no responsibilities and her earning capacity unaffected cannot expect to have her husband saddled with the obligation to maintain her,” said Miss Webb. Matters to be considered in deciding maintenance included the wife’s ability to provide for herself and care for the children; the husband's means and potential earning capacity (the latter to prevent his taking a lesser-pay-ing job to avoid maintenance); his actual as well as legal responsibilities (if he has a second family to support); the ability of the wife to increase her earning capacity; duration of the marriage and its effect on her earning ability. Liable, Too The mother was also liable for support of the children—subject to her responsibility for care. If the father or a third person had custody and the mother was earning she had equal obligations for maintenance.

The concept of equal partnership entered into the Guardianship Act, which also would come into force in January, 1970. For the first time parents were made equal guardians in law. At present the father was the legal guardian.

Custody Of Minors A great deal of dissatisfaction with the law relating to custody of minors more than 16 years of age had been expressed. Once they turned 16 youngsters could leave home and this often caused much stress in the family. Until they were 17 they could be brought before the court on child welfare proceedings for living in conditions harmful to their moral or physical wellbeing. Under the new act the court could order minors to return to their parents in any case where this was required for their moral welfare. This law required an application to the court for enforcement but it was hoped it would have an indirect, persuasive effect on the children involved.