Mr. Brian Merriman:

We have a lot of further thinking on these particular issues. On the penalty for the age limit, we do not see that any transgression by an adult should be visited on a child. That would be unacceptable. Second, if new categories are created such as an age limit of 24, which I cannot recall existing in anything else in law, then the potential for an infringement is created. I am also a little concerned that it brings back the old definition that a woman who was pregnant or a mother in some way did not have full capacity during that time to make decisions up to or after it. We have always fought the notion that maternity is an illness. There is an implication in saying suddenly one can decide anything from 18 but not this one. There is no reciprocation on a male donor in any way. They are fine at 18. We are concerned and we will come back to the committee on that.

In the other situation, we are looking once again at the best interests of the child, in particular if there are family units where the two parents are not together, etc. and it would be important to find a mechanism to recognise the role of the other adult directly involved in the child rearing. We have more work to do before we come back with a definitive position but it is about recognising the family units as well as the people who are parents, be they living together or not.