On Second Stage we raised a number of different issues relating to section 1 which I would like to tease out a little further. Deputy Theresa Ahearn raised the question of the names of fathers and mothers being included on every birth certificate. There is a problem with that, however, and there will be in future. I indirectly mentioned the same point in relation to health and medical statistics and information. We now have so many different kinds of family that it is important to keep a proper and complete record of these relationships. If we do not, in a few years' time we could have serious problems because some people, admittedly a limited number, will not know exactly who their siblings are. Deputy Ahearn said the names of fathers and mothers should be on every birth certificate. I know there are all sorts of other implications there but looking at the underlying situation from the medical viewpoint, what does the Minister think of that issue?
Registration of Births Bill, 1996 [ Seanad ]: Committee Stage and Remaining Stages.
I presume Deputy Woods is talking about the question of what names go on the certificate where parents are not married to each other. That situation is dealt with in section 48 and succeeding sections of the Status of Children Act, 1987, which deal with the parameters for putting the father's name on the certificate. It deals with the question of when it is agreed and the requirements of proof. Obviously, it is not simply a matter of the mother saying someone is the father. It is easy to say that but it may not be correct. The rules have to be laid down in some detail and they are in Part IX of the Status of Children Act, 1987. I am not proposing to make any amendments to that in this Bill.
I appreciate that covers quite a number of different situations but looking at it simply from a health viewpoint, it still leaves some things unanswered. With so many kinds of family in future, it will be important for children to know who their brothers, half-brothers and half-sisters are. If they do not, there could be a difficulty from a medical point of view if they find they are marrying their brothers or sisters. The suggestion is made from that point of view but I would not make any more of it than that. The issue is raised from time to time, although I know the Status of Children Act goes some way towards meeting that requirement where it is feasible and desirable. However, there is still an underlying situation.
I want to raise another point in relation to this matter. In Denmark, RSI numbers are allocated at birth. In fact, the Danish RSI number is based on the time, date and place where someone is born. When I was Minister for Social Welfare, RSI numbers were allocated to young people on reaching 16 years of age. It may well be that in future we will follow the Danish example, going right back to the beginning.
Perhaps we will, but it certainly will not arise under this Bill which is much more limited in its thrust. I take Deputy Woods's point about the importance of having a record of both parents from a medical point of view and I sympathise with that position. At the same time, one must be certain that the correct parents are recorded on the certificate. That is the other side of the coin but I take the point, which is an important one. We will have an ongoing look at that question for the general review of the registration system.
I thank the Minister. Another subsection of this section deals with the question of occupation which I raise as a general point. I wonder why we need to categorise people by their occupations. What value does that information have? As a matter of interest, I did not say that a stigma was attached to unemployment.
I thought perhaps the Deputy did not intend that.
A subsequent speaker said that. I felt that while someone might be unemployed when their child is born, they might be employed at other times. The original 1864 Act refers to what is intended; "rank or occupation". It clearly classifies people.
It is not "rank or occupation". "Rank or profession" are the words used.
That is correct. It refers to "rank or profession" of the father, but "profession" has since become "occupation". I am surprised the Minister, as a member of the Labour Party, does not realise the class implications. It sets that down every time one has to produce it. I do not want to go back to the points we discussed earlier and I will not disagree with the Minister. However, the reality is that the occupation of the father and mother will be included on the birth certificate.
According to Deputy Lynch, certain women will be identified as housewives but many of the mothers I know would be annoyed and upset by the Deputy's use of that term. These women see themselves as full-time workers in the home. The Minister stated that certain categories of people find different things offensive and there are those who have their own views about the amount of work carried out in the home. One of the problems we face is that this work has not been quantified but I hope this will be rectified in the near future.
I do not know how necessary or valuable it is to include this type of information on birth certificates. In the 1860s people did not often change their occupation. The person referred to in the example was a carpenter. As late as the 1940s over 50 per cent of the population worked in agriculture and could be effectively described as agricultural labourers.
In the future, birth certificates will list details of the occupations of both the father and the mother. People seeking grants, etc., must produce their birth certificates and these will now contain more personal data about themselves and their families. This strikes me as antiquated and odd and I wonder about the wisdom and value of continuing to use that designation. How valuable is it today? Perhaps the Danes have a better way to relate the circumstances of people's birth. I will not engage in further debate on this issue but I believe it is outmoded and creates a class distinction across society. The legislation aims to remove discrimination on the basis of gender but why not remove all discrimination at one time?
Section 1 is substantive while those that follow involve routine provisions. Subsection (3)(b) refers to:
...such other surname requested by either the mother or father as an tÁrd Chláratheoir or a person authorised by him or her may permit if her or she is satisfied that the circumstances so warrant,
What is the purpose of this provision? The Minister obviously used the example of a person from Iceland in this regard. I had Spain in mind as a possibility where people have double names, two names rolled into one.
It could be similar to Muslim countries where a person with the name "Ahmed Ben Hassan" has no surname as such.
I cannot complain in that regard because one of the derivations of my own surname is "Mac Con Coille" or "the son of the hound of the woods". I do not know how many hounds live in the woods or how many sons they have.
The Deputy is now the hound of the Labour Party.
I use Ó hUadhaigh as my Irish surname.
The Deputy can re-register.
Yes, and take another surname. The subsection covers that type of situation and will meet people's requirements. In that sense, it modernises our law and dovetails with our pluralist society.
I trust people will continue to follow a standard approach in respect of their father's or mother's surnames. Deputy Nealon was worried about genealogy which has become a source of employment in the west. Cottage industries have developed to deal with queries from people living in America, Canada and Australia who are interested in tracing their heritage. I hope they will not end up looking at a family bush rather than a family tree. If people exercise the options available under the legislation, there will be much confusion and listing people's occupations will not help to resolve matters. However, the provisions in section 1 are generally good and I support them.
Will the Minister enlighten me in respect of the need to list both parents' names on a birth certificate? Are there difficulties in other jurisdictions with regard to tracing siblings, etc., and the acknowledgment of children, particularly by their fathers?
Is the Deputy referring to the unmarried context?
Yes. There has been a dramatic increase in the numbers of young mothers giving birth. Young fathers can have children by separate partners which gives rise to the advent of half brothers and half sisters and I do not believe it is of benefit to children to be born into such circumstances. Is that situation adequately dealt with by current legislation? Will it be mandatory to name fathers on birth certificates in the future? I am not au fait with the law in this regard but is there sufficient legislative onus to ensure that both parents' names are included on birth certificates?
I am not aware of the proportion of births involving people who are not married which include the names of both parents on the birth certificate. A potential difficulty exists because it would not be sufficient to name a person as the father of a child unless they gave their agreement in that regard. The rules governing such cases were set down in 1987. In a case where both parents request the inclusion of both names on the birth certificate, there is no problem in doing so. Where that does not happen, the considerations and requirements set out in sections 48 and 49 of the relevant Act come into play. I do not know the proportion of cases where only one parent's name is registered. As I informed Deputy Woods, a problem exists and we will consider the matter to see if further improvement is reasonably possible in the course of the overall review.
This section deals with the provision of register books to registrars. I take it that after the enactment of the legislation there will be a requirement for new larger books. How many register books are normally in use?
There is one book for every registered district.
How many registered districts are there?
I do not know the exact figure but it is in excess of 300. This section provides for the surrender of existing books and the provision of new ones which are in the format of the new certificate for which we are providing in the Bill. Under existing rules one cannot surrender books until they are full and we have to make provision to allow for this so that the new format can be brought into play.
This section deals with the short title, the collective citation, construction and commencement. Section 7 (3) states: "This Act shall come into operation on such day as the Minister for Equality and Law Reform may appoint by order". On what day does the Minister propose to bring the legislation into operation?
I have to allow sufficient time to enable the Minister for Health to make arrangements for the provision of the new books, new instructions, circulation etc. I cannot give the exact day but I hope to nominate a date approximately six months hence.
The Victorian 1863 Act included a copy of the form so that people knew what it looked like. In the Schedule to the Bill the Minister states the details which will be included in the form. These include the number, date and place of birth, the sex of the child, the forename and surname of the child, the mother's forename and surname, address and occupation, any former surnames of the mother, the father's forename and surname, address and occupation, any former surnames of the father, signature, qualification and address of the informant when registered, the signature of the registrar, the forenames of the child if added after registration of birth and the date.
The period of the 1863 Act must have been one of great openness and transparency.
Do not forget accountability.
I am sure the legislators of that period were also accountable. However, it is easy to see they were open and transparent because they included a copy of the form in the Bill. This is supposed to be the age of openness, transparency, communications and public relations where extra advisers have been appointed to ensure we are really with it, yet Queen Victoria was ahead of us. It would be useful to include a copy of the form in the Bill so that we know the format.
I move: "That the Bill do now pass."
This legislation is very important in that it ensures equal treatment for women. While we are required to analyse each section in detail on Committee Stage this should not cloud the good nature of this long awaited legislation which will give mothers the same status as fathers in terms of birth certificates.
I thank Deputies Woods and Keogh for their contributions to this important measure. It is nice to be in a position to implement yet another recommendation of the Second Commission on the Status of Women. We are making great progress in implementing many of the recommendations in its report.
It is surprising that it has taken so long to introduce this modernising measure. We must be more prepared to introduce similar measures which cost little but which mean so much to so many people. The number of people who have expressed their immense gratitude and appreciation to the House for the introduction of the stillbirths register is remarkable. This is what makes participation in politics worthwhile. I am delighted this important measure has been passed by the House. It will make a difference to many people in the years ahead. I thank the staff of my Department who worked hard in the preparation of this Bill.
I thank and congratulate the Minister for bringing this simple yet important Bill through the House. Updating this antiquated law shows that attitudes towards women are changing, although there is still a great deal of work to be done. The passing of this legislation is a signal that the Government and the Dáil are committed to equality for women.
I join in congratulating the staff of the Minister's Department. People think this Bill is trivial because it does not cost a huge amount of money. However, as the Minister said, such Bills mean a great deal to many people. I am sure the staff in the Minister's Department are happy it is possible to introduce such legislation and that there is cooperation on all sides of the House.