Response by email

From Aine Clancy, FF Dublin Central

Dear Alan,

Thank you for email, in which you raise a number of important issues which I will deal with in turn.

First, the Labour Party, through its Spokesperson on Equality, has welcomed the recommendations from the Law Reform Commission contained in ' Report on Family Relationships'.

Labour is welcoming this report and the recommendations, which are consistent with Labour's own Guardianship of the Children Bill 2010, published in April. Our Bill was designed to vindicate the right of a child to know and have the company of each of its parents, unless there are compelling circumstances why this would not be in the interests of the child.

Clearly the Law Reform Commission's report is detailed and will need to be examined but there are many positive recommendations which I hope the Government will act on.

We need to update our legislation to protect the interests of both parents, and more importantly to enhance the rights of children. Children have a fundamental right in international law to the society of each of their parents, but the out-dated law on guardianship fails to vindicate that right. The law must be modernised to achieve this.

Second, the Labour Party Guardianship of Children Bill 2010 sought to ensure that every child's rights are vindicated by conferring an automatic guardianship role on natural fathers.

Third, however, your argument is that what the LRC is in fact proposing is to confer similiar rights on unmarried fathers by diluting the present statutory rights of married fathers.

On the one hand, as you point out, section 6 of the present Act says that the father and mother of a child shall be guardians of the child jointly.Reflecting a change in terminology from guardianship to parental responsibility, section 8 of the draft Bill appended to the LRC's Report says that "the father and mother of a child shall exercise joint parental responsibility for the child". I do not see that there is much significance difference between the two provisions. On the other hand, you correctly point to the fact to the fact the LRC decided against imposing a statutory duty on joint guardians to consult. This seems to mean that joint guardianship means that either guardian can separately make important guadianship decisions. In practice this will mean the one who has custody.

The Party has not considered this particular aspect of the argument. It is of course important to recognise the equal status of both parents but whether that should mean equal and independent status is open to question.

Any proposals put forward by Labour in responseto the LRC Report and its draft Bill will take into account the points you have made here and we look forward to receiving more detailed submissions from your orgainsation.

Kind regards

Aine Clancy