Synod rejects certificates

Press, 6 October 1987, Page 3

Synod rejects certificates

The Anglican Church rejected a suggestion that couples seek medical certificates before marrying. The idea was debated on the final day of the Christchurch diocesan Synod yesterday.

A motion that the Bishop of Christchurch, the Rt Rev. Maurice Goodall, be asked to consider the ethical value and practical consequences of requiring couples to seek medical examinations before marriage was put forward by a St Albans vicar, the Rev. David Pickering. The motion was defeated after 90 minutes debate.

Mr Pickering said he had considered raising the issue for several years, but the spread of the A.I.D.S. virus, and the knowledge that it could be passed on to children, had “tipped the balance” and provided the impetus for his proposal. He was not suggesting that a vicar or marriage celebrant should be advised of the results and so he did not see how it would be an invasion of anyone’s privacy. z A lay representative of St Peter’s Church, Upper Riccarton, Mr Mark Alexander, disagreed, saying he would feel that his privacy had been intruded on if a minister suggested he should have a medical examination before marrying.

A chaplain at Timaru Hospital, the Rev. Ken Davy, also opposed the motion. He said the effect of the proposal would be to increase the number of “impermanent unions” because people would not want to face the “daunting prospect of testing and certification.”

Testing for genetic disorders was also more complicated and costly than just a blood test, he said. Neither was testing for A.I.D.S. a simple or necessarily reliable procedure. , :

“Sometimes the tests ‘ produce false results, which could have disastrous effects on a relation-

ship,” said Mr Davy. “Let us give this proposal the mxyomatosis treatment without memorial.” A canon of Christchurch Cathedral and counsellor at the Campbell Centre, Canon John Greenslade, said Mr Pickering’s motion was trying to address a potentially disastrous situation but it was the “wrong approach.” The Synod would be better — if it was to consider the matter at all — to address its concerns to the Minister of Health rather than the Bishop, he said.

A more positive, and “less defeatist” move for the Church would be to better prepare and support couples for marriage by offering planning and counselling courses, and having more contact with the couples before the wedding, said Canon Greenslade. The seconder of the motion, Canon James Riley, an American vicar now living in New Zealand, said after the debate that blood tests were required by law in Missouri and Minnesota, where he had lived.

“In the 17 years I lived there before coming to New Zealand In 1975, noone ever raised the question of civil liberties,” said Canon Riley. “No-one wanting insurance objects to being asked to submit to the medical examination required by the insurer. Surely if we are prepared to give personal consent to intimate knowledge in business and financial relationships we should be even more willing to do so in establishing our most intimate and meaningful human relationships.” In his right of reply, Mr Pickering said he was sorry so many Synod members would not even agree to look at the issue. “We are trying to help the next generation. I am just a voice that is starting something that is essentially part of the Church’s duty,” he said.