Same-sex partners get rights of parent

By ANNE BESTON and NZPA

Rights for same-sex partners are among sweeping changes being proposed for family laws.



Parents will be able to jointly appoint partners - including de facto or same-sex partners - as guardians of children.

The new law will also mean a same-sex partner can be deemed a legal parent of a child conceived through fertility techniques, provided she or he gave their consent.

And a same-sex partner's position will be regarded as being the same as that of an opposite-sex partner.

Announcing the revoking of the 1968 Guardianship Act yesterday, Associate Justice Minister Lianne Dalziel said a key feature of the new Care of Children Bill was a change in emphasis.

The Guardianship Act was outdated and based on a traditional nuclear family model that "does not reflect the diversity of family arrangements that now exist", she said.



"We are placing greater emphasis on the role of parents in a child's upbringing by making it clear that all guardians continue to have status and responsibilities, whether or not they are living with a child."

But National Party spokesman Nick Smith said the bill had "too much political correctness" and was an attack on traditional families.

"This bill represents substantial erosion of the rights of natural parents and huge fuzziness about those who are responsible for the welfare of children," he said.





Auckland family lawyer Simon Jefferson said the bill was not a radical shake-up of family law, but would bring "antiquated" legislation into line with other family law, in particular the Children, Young Persons and their Families Act.

"The 1968 law was long overdue for a revamp," he said.

"This represents a change in emphasis, and that change is important."

He said the Family Court had been criticised for being "toothless" and unable to rule on important issues such as paternity.

Where the father once had to go to the High Court to resolve a paternity dispute, that would now be dealt with in the Family Court.

Mr Jefferson said the bill would help partners who complained the other parent was able to flout Family Court access orders.

"In response to that, the bill has beefed up the provisions for the court to enforce compliance and that should be welcomed by men's groups," he said.

Ms Dalziel said the bill would give the Family Court the ability to request reports into a child's cultural background and would allow individuals to address the court on cultural issues.

Mr Jefferson said that was not a radical change, as it was already provided for under the Children, Young Persons and their Families Act.

Under the bill, the Family Court will also be able to enforce contact agreements between donors and parents of a child born as a result of human reproductive technology, in certain circumstances.



The Union of Fathers, the national men's organisation lobbying for fathers' rights, said the Family Court was a "failed experiment" and the bill was "window dressing".

"We have argued all along for equal, shared custody as the default position, and they haven't even attempted to do that," said spokesman Darrell Carlin.

"We want arbitration, not a court where lawyers are so heavily involved and where a mother, for instance, is forced to say terrible things about the father. Where is the benefit to the child in that?"

Act MP Muriel Newman said she was disappointed by the bill.

It was meant to ensure separated parents shared parenting of their children, she said.

"Instead, a heavy-handed, punitive regime has been introduced.

"This could see parents, who have been disadvantaged by unfair court orders which are detrimental to their relationship with their children, fined or thrown in jail."

Family Court hearings:

Guardianship of a child ends at 18, not the previous 20 years.
Parents will be able to jointly appoint partners as guardians including de-facto and same-sex partners.
Same-sex partners can be legal parents of a child conceived through fertility techniques.
Family Courts will be given broader powers to enforce the orders they make and will have broader powers to rule on paternity disputes.
Publication of Family Court proceedings will be relaxed.