Page 3464 - Week 12 - Tuesday, 11 October 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I concede, however, Madam Speaker, that it is probably going too far to attempt to outlaw involvement in these arrangements where money is not involved, and perhaps equally unfortunate to attempt to stigmatise those who, for quite genuine personal reasons, believe that it is appropriate to assist people to take part in this process. That is why I believe, after much thought, that Mrs Carnell's amendments before the house tonight are appropriate. There are a number of doctors involved in in-vitro fertilisation programs and other infertility programs in this city and elsewhere. They feel very strongly that their involvement should continue, and they should not suffer the danger of being struck off for professional misconduct by virtue of their continuing involvement in those sorts of arrangements.
I do not want to say any more about this legislation, except that I believe, as is the case with much that we pass and do in this Assembly, that we should monitor its operation when it has an impact on the lives of ordinary people. It may be that we can see these sorts of arrangements continue - I assume, in small numbers. I do not imagine that many people will be rushing out to bear their sister's children, or a relation's children or a friend's children; but it is important for us to ensure that the consequence of this sort of legislation is not beyond the intention or the foreseeing of this Assembly tonight, and that we will be vigilant to ensure that this arrangement that we put in place, this liberty to engage in these activities in certain limited circumstances, will not be abused to the detriment of the children who are the primary focus of so much of our law - our children's services legislation, our Family Law Act and so on. It is the children who are the primary focus of those sorts of pieces of legislation. They should also be the primary focus of legislation such as that before the Assembly tonight, and I hope that we achieve that through the arrangements which are put in place through this Bill, as amended.
MR MOORE (10.25): Madam Speaker, on an overseas trip that my wife and I undertook some years ago we had a discussion with some distant relatives about some of the backgrounds of our own families. In those discussions there came to light a relationship that we would think of in terms of surrogacy, but it came from people who are over 80 years old. They were talking about things that had happened but which had been basically buried in their family closet for quite a number of years. It strikes me that this form of love, where somebody bears a child for somebody else, is not new at all. It has been going on for a long time.
I think what is new about the notion of surrogacy is that some sharp people decided that it was an appropriate way to set up a commercial business to take advantage of women. As Mr Humphries pointed out, that is the whole motivation behind such forms of surrogacy changes, and people who are vulnerable are taken advantage of. That is why legislation like this - legislation that assists us in protecting the weak or the vulnerable from such sharp operators - has a very important role to play. Commercial arrangements that deal with surrogacy are appropriately dealt with by this legislation. It seems to me that this legislation also ensures consistency on the part of the Territory in regard to other legislation in terms of the family - things like the Family Law Act and the other Acts that Mr Humphries referred to. The most important thing that comes through in this legislation is priority for the welfare of the child. I think that that, in itself, is significant.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .