RESPONSIBLE Paternity Legislation is something St. Lucia should consider. That’s the private view of a senior Health Ministry official.
The official, who is knowledgeable about the issue, but spoke in an individual capacity, identified some of the more prominent issues with the single parenthood phenomenon being so pervasive in St. Lucian society, including the cyclical poverty that comes about as a result.
The health official explained that such a law could be massive not only for our children, but also for gender equality; and it can also be based on legislation already established in other countries.
In 2001, Costa Rica introduced its “Ley de Paternidad Responsable” (Responsible Fatherhood Act), which has had a far-reaching impact on many facets of Costa Rican society.
Described as “the first of its kind anywhere in the world”, the law focuses on “the right of children to know their fathers and to be supported by them” and also attempts to remove the stigma attached to children born out of wedlock, as the man identified as the father, would be obligated not only to take care of his child, but to also pass on his surname, which would be on the child’s birth certificate.
Although some may think that this law (as per usual in cases like these) skewers towards the mothers, perhaps its most interesting facet may prove otherwise, as it also “mandates genetic testing if the purported father denies paternity, with the courts required to abide by the results” — and with the added bonus that those “DNA tests are done, free of charge…”
However, opponents hold that the law heavily favours women, to the detriment of men’s rights.
In an LA Times article entitled ‘Costa Rica Lays Down Law for Deadbeat Dads’, Federico Malavassi, the then vice president of the legislature, said: “The law is not proportional. The father is left out…” The vice president eventually concluded that “It’s vindictive.”
One impact this law has had on Costa Rica — and could also have here — is the dramatic drop in the number of children who were unrecognized by their fathers – a more than 21 per cent drop from 29.3% in 1999 to 7.8% in 2003.
However, with the passing of the law, Costa Rica has seen a precipitous increase in the sales of condoms, and a corresponding drop in birth rates.
In what the author (of the cited article) calls “more responsible sexual behaviour”, Costa Rican men immediately began buying more condoms after the passage of this law, which saw “Costa Rican birth rates plummet in 2002 compared with 2001.”
This plummet could bring about an additional burden to an already tested Education sector here in St. Lucia, which has had to deal with the steady decline of student enrolment numbers due to declining birth rates, by merging schools with low student populations, a phenomenon that continues to create a seismic shift in that sector.
The local health official argues that as it stands, St. Lucia does not meet up to the standards set by the UN, regarding the “rights of the child” – including their right to know both parents.
The officer went on to argue that despite the fact that the majority of children in St. Lucia are brought up by single mothers, “children also have the right to know their father…and likewise fathers to know their child/children [and this] is not taken into consideration”.
The official added that “St. Lucia as a country is not entirely meeting the requirements set by the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of a Child.”
The source provided some reasons why this law should be considered by our legislature, stating that in the absence of marital documents, documents obligating the man to assume his parental rights; such an obligation is more difficult to legally impose, when couples are not married, typically leaving the women to care for the children without the support of fathers.
According to the officer, “When paternity is not established — like in many cases in St. Lucia — this leads to intergenerational cycles of poverty and vulnerability for several generations because mothers are not always adequately prepared to provide for their child/children mentally, emotionally as well as financially. Establishing paternity is supposed to provide a platform for guaranteed child support.”
The passing of this law would also see (like in Costa Rica) “A DNA test being done within the first month of a child’s birth” and “Registration of Birth Certificates [being] done in six weeks, unless otherwise instructed.”
The local official added that “The rehabilitation of men in society is another reason for establishing paternity as early as possible, given the emotional and psychological aspects of these cases where the child/children most often are caught in the middle of parental disputes and do not have that advantage of receiving that level of nurturing from a father figure, which is essential for their growth and development.”
The health officer argued that “Men must be active players in supporting their child/children in all aspects of their life, which include, emotional and financial support…” and insisted that “this increased role will bring about an improvement to our nation, especially when it comes to the issue of the ‘underachieving boy’ globally in regards to their performance at school.”
Both the pros and cons of this law are there for all to see. One wonders how St. Lucians will react to the proposal of such a law.
