There is no logical reason why Julie Anne Genter's pregnancy should affect her chances of becoming Green Party co-leader.

If some in the party think having a baby would be too distracting for a co-leader, then the same could apply to her rival, Marama Davidson.

Davidson has six children, the youngest of them aged nine, 10 and 12.

Genter's partner, Peter Nunns, is going to be a stay-at-home parent after Genter takes three months off.


Childcare arrangements were certainly never an issue when former co-leader Russel Norman and his partner had two babies when he was in office.

As a progressive party, the Greens have long supported the rights of all women, including mothers, to reach their full potential.

It would run counter to Green Party philosophy to suggest that a new baby would be a disadvantage.

But it could quietly reinforce the primary argument being run by Davidson supporters - that Genter is already committed as a minister with three portfolios (Women, Associate Transport and Associate Health) and that an MP more independent of Government is required to tend to party membership.

As Minister for Women and an MP in a progressive party, is it hardly surprising that Genter decided she could be a minister, co-leader and a new mother all at the same time.

One hopes she didn't have some ambivalence but felt obliged to plough on with those ambitions as a progressive role model.

If that is the case, she still has time to reconsider.

Green delegates don't begin voting in the contest for another five weeks.

Having had two miscarriages, no one will be more acutely aware than Genter of the need to protect herself and her baby.

Genter deserves the right to aim as high as she can, but also deserves the right to alter her expectations if she wants to.