Parliamentary inquiry into surrogacy

Shortly before the end of last year it was announced that the Attorney General has asked the House of Representative Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs to inquire into the regulatory and legislative aspects of international and domestic surrogacy arrangements.

The Committee is to consider:

• The existing legislative arrangements, policies and practices and existing international obligations – including family law, immigration, citizenship, child support, passports and privacy – and inconsistencies that exist;
• Medical and welfare aspects, including the role of health care providers and welfare services;
• Issues about informed consent, exploitation, rights, payments and protections; and
• Information sharing between the states and territories and the Commonwealth.

The Committee's report is due by 30 June 2016.

The difficult role of an Independent Children's Lawyer

Late last year a Family Court judgement made headlines when orders were made that provided for the children's lawyer to remain appointed until the youngest child turned 18.

An independent children's lawyer is bound to seek Orders in the children's best interests. Their appointment is for the length of the Court proceedings.

The children's lawyer in the matter of Stacey & Woden however was left in a difficult position.

Allegations that the children were at risk of harm from the father had been made by the mother. The Court expert that found that there were risk factors present, a Police investigation commenced and Child Protective Services conducted an inquiry. But in the meantime the parents recommenced the children spending unsupervised time with the father.

Both the Police and Protective Services investigations resolved that no further action could be taken.
    

The Court then had to determine, without the benefit of a contested trial as the mother had withdrawn from the proceedings, whether the existing arrangements whereby one child lived with him and the other spent time with both where in the best interests of the children.

The independent children's lawyer, arguing that the risk was unacceptable but that no other protective course was available, took the unusual step of seeking to remain appointed so that he could continue to liaise with children's school and medical practitioners and Child Protective Services into the future. In making the Orders the Court acknowledged the onerous task ahead for the lawyer.