Dr. Thomas Finegan:

To answer the last question, no. At the outset of my presentation I tried to paint in relief the two competing rights and interests at stake.

On the one hand, there are the best interests of the child vying for consideration as the paramount interest and, on the other, there is adult reproductive autonomy also vying for consideration. When it comes to Parts 3 and 5, the latter wins. There is deemed to be a right to a child. On that basis, the rights and interests of a child are ignored, including the right to two parents, the right to know his or her own genetic identity and that of the biological parents, the right to the care and support of natural parents and also a right to a mother and a father, where practicable. The way this general scheme balances it is to tip the scales most definitely in favour of all adults. There is no point in limiting it to one group or sub-group - all adults are included. The best interests of the child only kick in when he or she has been created or produced and placed in a particular family environment. The best interests of the child in that precise context are made subservient, which is problematic from the point of view of the UNCRC and our constitutional tradition which recognises a natural right of a child to the care and support in society of natural parents, even outside the marital context.