Wall Louisa: Sullivan Birth Certificate Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWall Louisa: Sullivan Birth Certificate Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 07 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12456. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]LOUISA WALL (Labour—Manurewa):Kia orana Mr Deputy Speaker. Tēnā koutou katoa. I moveThat the Sullivan Birth Certificate Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Government Administration Committee to consider the bill.I am proud to be the sponsor of this private bill. The circumstances that have resulted in this bill arose from an email I received during the passage of the marriage equality legislation and that I referred to in my third reading speech. I would like to refresh members’ minds as to what that email stated: “My partner and I had been together for 7 years when we decided to start a family. When our daughter was born my partner’s name was on her birth certificate as her birth mother. When our daughter was 13 my partner was diagnosed with terminal cancer. We talked to our solicitor and found out that the only way I could adopt our daughter was if the relationship with her mum was legally terminated. How could we possibly do that to a child who was faced with her mum dying? Instead I applied for and was granted guardianship. When my daughter turned 18 the guardianship expired. It was only when my own parents died that it struck home with me that my daughter and I had no legal relationship despite me having been her parent all her life. We talked it over and I applied to adopt her. Fortunately all this happened before she turned 20 because I believe it might have been too late. It was the right thing to do but still hard on her. She gets a new birth certificate and her mum legally no longer exists. This is just so ridiculous and so wrong. If your bill had been law when my partner was still alive then we could have married and our daughter would have both her parents recorded as such.”That email highlighted the difficulty and trauma faced by the promoter Rowen Sullivan who was brought into the world and brought up by two parents who both happened to be women but her birth certificate does not record that fact and cannot do so without this bill. Private bills are not often used but are defined by McGee Burrows and Carter as bills that are for the benefit of named individuals and this bill is precisely for that purpose. This bill is for the benefit of Rowen Sullivan and her parents Doreen Shields and the late Diane Sullivan Rowen’s birth mother.The benefit for Rowen is best summed up in her own words. I asked her for a statement for this first reading. She said: “I think it was much harder for my parents to have me in the 1990s than it would be now. There did not seem to be any famous gay people raising children together which makes it more familiar to other people. It was not such a common thing so they had to figure out how to make our family work and deal with people who did not think we were a proper family. I think your family are the people who love you and raise you not necessarily the people who share your blood. Ihave registered my details in case any of my siblings want to make contact but this is just out of curiosity not because I am looking for family. My parents meant to have me. I was not an accident or a mistake. Other people can have both their parents on their birth certificate and they don’t have to choose between having their mum’s name taken off or having no family at all as far as the law is concerned. Some people ask why this matters. It is just a piece of paper. I want my mum’s name on my birth certificate to honour her and everything she went through to have me and to stay with me when she got sick. She loved me and I will always love her.”This young woman was placed in a position that no one should ever have to face. She had a birth certificate that recorded her mum’s name only. The reality was that she had two parents who loved her whom she loved. Together they were a family. But when her mum became terminally ill the reality of her legal relationship with her other parent Doreen was brought to the fore.Adoption was not an option at that stage as it would result in Rowen’s birth mum’s name being removed from her birth certificate at a time when they were all dealing with Diane’s illness and eventual death. Doreen became a guardian under the Care of Children Act. Her guardianship expired when Rowen turned 18 in 2011. At that point Rowen’s mum had passed away. Rowen and Doreen then decided to apply for an adoption order given that from 23 February 2011 there was no legal recognition of their relationship.Doreen explains that decision in her own statement. She said: “I adopted Rowen so that there would be a legal relationship between us especially if one of us became sick. I also wanted to make a commitment to her that she always had a claim on me no matter what happened in the future. The fact is that I have been Rowen’s parent all her life but Diane was her mum and death has not changed that. Diane fought a hard battle against cancer and survived far longer than anyone expected. That was simply because she wanted to be there for her daughter. Rowen’s birth certificate should tell the truth of where she came from but her mum is missing from it so it is a lie. Her mum never gave her up—never. Death took Rowen’s mum away from her and we can’t change that but the law erased her mum from her birth certificate and that can be put right. Diane deserves to be acknowledged as Rowen’s mum and Rowen and any children she might have are entitled to an honest record of her family and where she comes from.”This matter can be addressed only by the passing of this private bill. If Rowen were born in New Zealand today both her parents could be recorded on her birth certificate as a result of the 2004 amendment to the Status of Children Act 1969 which recognises both partners as parents where there has been a birth as a result of an assisted human reproduction—or AHR—procedure. A birth certificate can then record the birth mother and her partner as the other parent. Under the Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Act 2013 the spouse of a birth parent can jointly adopt a child and therefore the removal of the birth parent’s details would not be required.However these options and avenues are not available to Rowen because her mum has passed away and she is now over 20. The only way both of her parents’ names can be on her birth certificate—the one legal document that records her origin and her parents—is by a private bill. I ask that all members support this bill which honours the reality of Rowen’s family and allows her to remember her mum and record it properly when she is asked. Adding Diane Sullivan’s name to Rowen’s current birth certificate which records only one parent Doreen may not seem much to ask but it will make a significant difference to this family. Kia ora.