Questions for Mary Davis, presidential candidate

James Jones wrote: »

Minister for Justice Alan Shatter recently said HERE that

The programme for Government contains a commitment to reform and modernise aspects of family law. In this context, I want to assure my colleague the recommendations in the Law Reform Commission’s report are under consideration by me and my Department, as are other crucial reforms in the area of family law. Ultimately, it is my hope to publish a family law Bill. In addressing some of the areas of family law, I expect not to be in a position to publish that Bill until next year.

Most commentators (HERE and HERE) and the media (HERE, HERE and HERE) have been enthusiastic about the proposals to grant automatic guardianship to unmarried fathers but do not seem to be aware of the "hidden agenda" of reducing the status of guardianship by removing the need to act jointly (as per Section 6.-(1) of the Guardianship of Infants Act 1964) and so granting full power and control to the custodial parent (usually the mother). The proposals also recommend granting guardianship to people other than parents (aunts, uncles and new partners) and so will further undermine a non residential parent (usually the father).
Ireland is obliged to alter the current system to allow a child to know and be cared for by its parents by the Convention on the Rights of the Child but reducing the rights of married fathers to create equality for unmarried fathers would be unconstitutional (Why not just grant unmarried fathers the same status as married fathers without reducing the status of married fathers?).
Also, the repeal (rather than the amendment) of the Guardianship of Infants Act would result in all previous Court Judgements becoming irrelevant, the most powerful being B. Vs B. which emphasised the equality of parents. Judge J. Walsh stated on page 61 as follows:

“The main purpose of the Guardianship of Infants Act, 1964, was to give to both parents of an infant equal rights in guardianship matters. In doing so, it provided a statutory expression of the rights already guaranteed by the Constitution".

He also said

“Section 6 of the Act states the equality of the parents and recognises them as the guardians of the infant; there is nothing in any provision of the Act which purports to confer on the court or any other body the power to displace either one or both of the parents from the position of guardian or guardians”.


Would you allow for such a law to be enacted?


NOTE: Hidden Agenda = Not in the Press Release but in the REPORT

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION
4.05 The Commission recommends that a general statutory requirement
to consult should not be included in legislation concerning parental
responsibility.

page 45