Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

State to challenge High Court Surrogacy ruling

  • 06-06-2013 10:06pm
    #1
    josip
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,423 ✭✭✭✭


    I've just read that the state will go to the Supreme Court on this http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0606/454938-surrogacy-birth-certs/.

    I'm a bit surprised. What have they got to gain? They're defending an outdated constitution. De Valera and McQuaid could never have dreamt of the current range of possibilities for becoming a parent.
    Tagged:


Comments

  • #2
    Moonbeam
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,986 Mod ✭✭✭✭Moonbeam


    It is a hard one and it needs to be legislated for.


  • #3
    josip
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,423 ✭✭✭✭josip


    Does challenging it in the Supreme Court do anything to further the legislation? Also, can legislation override something in the constitution? I thought in that case you'd have to have a referendum.


  • #4
    nesf
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,644 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    josip wrote: »
    Does challenging it in the Supreme Court do anything to further the legislation? Also, can legislation override something in the constitution? I thought in that case you'd have to have a referendum.

    Not necessarily. The Supreme Court's reading of the Constitution is what defines what can and cannot be legislated for. So we could have something like the X Case where the Supreme Court found a limited right to abortion in our Constitution. Here it could find the right falls with the genetic rather than birthing mother, or it may not. If it does, then no referendum is necessary unless the Government wants the birthing mother to be the legal mother in all cases.


  • #5
    nicowa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 700 ✭✭✭nicowa


    nesf wrote: »
    Not necessarily. The Supreme Court's reading of the Constitution is what defines what can and cannot be legislated for. So we could have something like the X Case where the Supreme Court found a limited right to abortion in our Constitution. Here it could find the right falls with the genetic rather than birthing mother, or it may not. If it does, then no referendum is necessary unless the Government wants the birthing mother to be the legal mother in all cases.


    Another point to note though is the difference between the genetic mother and the 'actual' mother in cases where it's a donated egg implanted in the womb of the woman intending to raise the child. So how do you legislate for that?


  • #6
    nesf
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,644 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    nicowa wrote: »
    Another point to note though is the difference between the genetic mother and the 'actual' mother in cases where it's a donated egg implanted in the womb of the woman intending to raise the child. So how do you legislate for that?

    I don't know, you force people to make out contracts stating who is the mother before any such procedures are carried out in the State and have some default position that a judge can reverse in cases where the procedure was carried out outside the State.

    *shrugs*


  • Advertisement
Advertisement