Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)

I do not worry about the ability of the Oireachtas to deal objectively with issues. Senator Feeney described the example of a female same-sex couple, one of whom is the biological parent of a child. Leaving aside the testamentary guardianship issue, they can make arrangements for the death of one or both partners in the form of a will but this would be subject to the Succession Act 1965. If the biological parent previously divorced the natural father of the child, the father may be entitled to a legal share under the 1965 Act. If there are other children from previous relationships, they could apply under section 117 of the Act for proper provision on the basis that they were not looked after. These are not simple issues.

As I noted in my response to amendment No. 1, Irish law gives primacy to the biological link between parent and child in assigning rights and duties. While emotive issues arise from the loving relationships between children and same-sex couples, this does not detract from the rights of natural parents who are not part of this relationship. The Supreme Court has ruled that they are constitutionally entitled to these rights irrespective of whether they exercise them. John Waters regularly defends the rights of unmarried fathers and this is a relatively analogous situation in that ignoring the rights of a natural father in the example to which Senator Feeney referred would be a contravention of the Constitution. That is further reason for looking at this issue in a holistic and comprehensive way. I accept the bona fides of Senators who say they are not happy we are opposing their amendments but the Ombudsman for Children accepts wider issues arise.

Senator Norris raised a case which he acknowledged was hypothetical involving a biological parent who is the same-sex partner of the adoptive parent of the child.