Dr. Geoffrey Shannon:

I would say all three are of equal weight. It is important that some person has the standing to ensure the child's voice and welfare are front and centre when a court comes to make a decision. This touches on the second issue, which is capacity. It is my view that if a child is capable of articulating his or her views the best person to articulate those views is the child. Sometimes we have a tendency to overly professionalise the system. My experience of hearing children directly has been that children want to be heard by the decision maker. They feel empowered by being heard. What we then need to do is provide them with the supports to ensure this occurs. I read Dr. O'Mahony's evidence and I support the view there is a problem with the funding. My solution to this is to have a national system for funding all representatives of children, be they in public or private law proceedings.

If one considers the Children and Family Relationships Act and if one considers sections 31 and 32 of that Act, the funding can fall on the shoulders of the applicants. If the constitutional aspiration is to ensure the voice of the child is heard, there is nothing in the constitutional aspiration that refers to having regard to the resources of the parent. It is an access to justice issue because if we are committed to hearing the voice of a child, we should have a national system for ensuring that children are heard in all proceedings affecting them. The overarching requirement is set out in Article 12 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which states that the child should to be heard, having regard to the age and maturity of the child in all judicial and administrative proceedings. That is why I believe we should have a national body such as the guardian ad litemservice in the North.

I welcome the developments by the Department of Children and Youth Affairs, and this is being scoped out currently in terms of the childcare (amendment) Bill, but I suggest it is equally important in divorce cases. Sometimes we see children as bystanders in the divorce process. Children are hugely affected by divorce and they need to be supported through that process. Whether it is public or private law proceedings, my view is that it is a question not just of having the expert but ensuring that the vulnerable parents are not burdened with the cost of that expert at a very traumatic time in their lives.