Doug PollardGay Dads Alliance Update
DOUG: We have with us in the studio James Cristoffelsz from the Gay Dads’ Alliance and James, we were talking about this off air just now. This whole business about criminalising overseas surrogacy is not really a major issue, is it?
JAMES: Well, I - - -
DOUG: People are getting very scared about this.
JAMES: - - - yes. There is a lot of fear and if I recall my own experience when I went through surrogacy – commercial surrogacy, you have a lot of fear in this whole process. So when your local legislation tells you that you’re a potential criminal it just adds to that fear. That’s only very natural. But I think the key is to understand there’s been fear around the legislation that puts potential activity that you’d do in gay family structures into that criminal element. For example, if you’re co-parenting when the woman self-inseminated – I’m not sure if it’s still current, but it did actually - - -
DOUG: It was criminalised at one point at least, wasn’t it?
JAMES: - - - it was. It was.
DOUG: Nobody was every prosecuted.
JAMES: I mean, who’s going to prosecute these things?
DOUG: You reckon the same thing will happen with this overseas surrogacy clause?
JAMES: I suspect that the biggest strength we have around how ridiculous this is how can you criminalise a child’s parent based on a date when the actual – you know, their neighbour who’s got two gay dads. Who went through a commercial surrogacy, are not criminals. There has to be something about the constitution not – sort of, it’s intent and not making sense around that.
DOUG: Well, there is a move to have that part of the Bill declared unconstitutional.
JAMES: M’mm.
DOUG: I know there’re legal and private inquiries, maybe a challenge on that basis there’s also a thought that maybe the Attorney-General might not proclaim that part of the law. What does that mean? Proclaiming. That part of the law.
JAMES: I’m not an expert here [laughs] so I’m conscious of travelling on this ground, to be frank. I understand the legislation can be passed in certain elements and also the date is the critical component.
DOUG: Okay. Until the official proclamation is made it’s not fully in to law.
JAMES: Yeah. I think the concerns are how do they treat people who are currently going through the process, in particular question are those children in utero now, at the moment. The embryos that are on ice. People who’ve actually gone through the process and of course this is not just a gay issue, this is about - - -
DOUG: I was going to come on to that, it affects everybody.
JAMES: - - - yeah. So I think possibility the horse may have bolted. But I don’t think they’ve thought about what the impact or consequences have been. I think that’s why the Attorney-General – as I understand it, has been struggling with this proclamation.
DOUG: We might well have some more good news on that in the near future – we hope.
JAMES: Well, possibly – I mean, you know – its 15-years away and then by that stage it’ll be ridiculous. So - - -
DOUG: In the meantime, take the instruction of the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy and: don’t panic.
JAMES: - - - yeah. Yeah.
DOUG: That’s one thing out of the way – now, you’re involved in another campaign?
JAMES: Yeah.
DOUG: “My Kid Calls Me a Parent, Why Doesn’t the Law”.
JAMES: Yes.
DOUG: Tell me about that.
JAMES: “The Meeting Place” in Melbourne is a group that meets – which is a forum for all gay dads regardless of how they form their parenthood, we had a lawyer come and speak with us about I suppose, our rights. Generally, at law and it raised some grave concerns; s.60H is the section of the law – the Family Law Act (1975), the federal governance that deals with children born under artificial conception methods. So now two mums are recognised as valid parents at law but still, there is no recognition for gay men who have children through surrogacy. Or for those gay men that co-parent with either lesbian or straight women. In particular where there’s a need to recognise these people as parents. That’s the background to it, if you like.
DOUG: You’re hoping there’ll be a change after this election I should think because they’ve talked about changing adoption law, for example?
JAMES: Yep.
DOUG: M’mm, would that have any impact on this campaign of yours?
JAMES: Yeah. I think – m’mm, that would have an impact. I think the path around change to s.60H through legislative change is a longer path that has to be travelled - - -
DOUG: M’mm, m’mm.
JAMES: - - - but the campaign at this stage, the next step is the launch of an issues paper. So we get much more education and understanding around the problem or issue - - -
DOUG: M’mm, m’mm.
JAMES: The second part that has been talked about in some of the groups that have met thus far is the notion of putting what I’m calling a class action. In place – class action’s not the right term. But a declaration of parentage for a whole group of gay dads that are obviously, parents-at-law. There’s a step-process in this in trying to recognise all of us, you know? I think the most obvious recognition is those gay dads who have had their children through surrogacy. Quite obviously, there’s no other female parent in the scenario. Once we get that in place hopefully, through precedent is what I’m talking about we then have the option to say – well, what does this mean for those men who co-parent? With either one woman or two women. (and) That gets raised, there. It also begs the question of who-is-a-donor versus who-is-a-parent versus who-is-a-father – there’re 3-main categories.
DOUG: Ouch.
JAMES: Yeah. So, it’s quite large.
DOUG: The best of luck with all that, James. How can people get in-touch with you to find out more about all this?
JAMES: The Gay Dads’ Alliance website: www.gaydadsalliance.com.au. Has all the information about the issues paper, the launch – we’re looking to do it nationally, as well – so we’ve a ‘phone hook-up for those people across Australia. (and) We’ll set that in place pretty quickly. But – yeah, we’re going to need people to understand the issue, support the issue and in particular anyone who is interested in helping with what I’m calling this class action would be welcome.
DOUG: Thank you very much for joining us today, James.
