Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 13 Hansard (4 December) . . Page.. 4628 ..

MR WOOD (continuing):

It seems to me that the result does not conform to the overall spirit, because it no longer makes the facilitation of surrogacy illegal. This is the issue we will seek to raise in the next Assembly.

Mr Speaker, I know of the circumstances of one family in the ACT. As a new grandparent for the first time, I am well reminded of the joy that a new life brings to a family, and I know of the despair of families who cannot have the children they desire. But the ramifications of the use of this technology - the difficult social, legal and moral issues, and the potential for a disastrous lack of success - require that we consider carefully whether we should exceed those principles that are well established and have been accepted by other jurisdictions. Hence, the Opposition will not support an extension of the laws on surrogacy until that further consideration.

MS TUCKER (5.59): The Bill before us today, the Artificial Conception (Amendment) Bill, provides a process for genetic parents to be recognised as the parents of a child born under the Substitute Parent Agreements Act. The Greens will be opposing this legislation. Mrs Carnell, in her letter to all members, said that this "should be seen as a simple method of registering a biological fact. It should not be used as a means of dealing with child welfare - this is best dealt with by existing laws and processes". This is a worrying approach, I believe. The Government seems to believe that biological issues can somehow be separated from ethical, psychological or emotional issues. Human beings are not that simple. This is a most complex and difficult area.

Although the Bill is not strictly making the 1994 legislation enforceable, it does have the objective of increasing the legal assurance that substitute parent agreements provide. Surrogacy is a very tricky issue and I by no means feel comfortable with the approach that the Government has taken. This Bill relates to the needs of adults - in particular, the needs of specific adults who are caught as a result of the first Bill being inadequate. Of course, a child also has been born, and Mrs Carnell tells me that others are on the way. This is very unfortunate in some ways, but I cannot see that we should be forced into producing more bad law because of that.

To quote the Community Advocate, who prepared a paper on the Artificial Conception (Amendment) Bill:

Surrogacy is inherently about the interests and rights of adults and there is therefore a great need for the legislative protection for the interests and rights of the child. There is not sufficient emphasis on the primacy of the rights and interests of the child.

Part of the concern about surrogacy is that it is attempting to apply a model of contract law to a very complex area of human experience. Apart from concern about the welfare of children, there is also widespread concern about the welfare of the birth mother. The ALP, after supporting the amendment which allowed altruistic surrogacy agreements to be entered into in the ACT, has had a change of heart and believes the whole Substitute Parent Agreements Act should be revisited in the next Assembly, and I concur with this approach.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .