[GA- FAILED] Marriage And Custody Act

Status
Not open for further replies.
Namwenia

Namwenia

Your Comrade
Pronouns
He/Him
ga.jpg

Marriage And Custody Act
Category: Civil Rights | Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Magecastle Embassy Building A5 | Onsite Topic​
Noting that the repeal of "Contact rights between Parent and Child" has left an ominous silence in World Assembly law surrounding custody rights, and in particular, the civil right against arbitrary removal of custody,

Believing the discrimination and prejudice often faced by those who happen merely to have been born to unmarried parents to also be grossly unjust and a fundamental violation of the right to non-discrimination, despite past World Assembly law not having yet addressed discrimination against such individuals,

Wishing to correct the silence of World Assembly law on both of these topics of concern by collectively legislating,

The World Assembly enacts as follows, subject to relevant past World Assembly resolutions still in force
  1. In this resolution, "ward" means a minor or otherwise an individual lacking in mental capacity so as to require being under the custody of some "guardian".
  2. All member nations must recognise a person's status as having been born to or conceived by unmarried biological parents as an arbitrary, reductive characteristic. Accordingly, each member nation is to address discrimination and hate crime motivated by an individual's status as being born to or conceived by unmarried biological parents with the same haste and severity as discrimination and hate crime motivated by race, sexuality, gender, or any other arbitrary, reductive characteristic. Further, no parents may be discriminated against in the granting or revocation of any parental right, duty, or privilege due to said parents' current or former married or unmarried status.
  3. A member nation may only revoke an individual's status as a legal parent, guardian, or custodian of a ward where necessary to
    1. protect that ward's emotional, mental, or physical wellbeing;
    2. enforce a prison sentence, contain someone currently charged with a crime, or otherwise ensure the functioning of court proceedings; or
    3. revoke guardianship or custody over a particular ward whom that individual has freely and in good faith renounced such guardianship or custody over.
  4. No person may be discriminated against in any Section 3 procedure based on their holding or lack of any arbitrary, reductive characteristic. Further, due weight must be provided in a Section 3 procedure to the freely expressed views of the ward in question vis-à-vis that procedure, should that ward be able to form and outwardly express their own views on said procedure.
Click to expand...
Note: Only votes from TNP WA nations and NPA personnel will be counted. If you do not meet these requirements, please add (non-WA) or something of that effect to your vote.
Voting Instructions:
  • Vote For if you want the Delegate to vote For the resolution.
  • Vote Against if you want the Delegate to vote Against the resolution.
  • Vote Abstain if you want the Delegate to Abstain from voting on this resolution.
  • Vote Present if you are personally abstaining from this vote.
Detailed opinions with your vote are appreciated and encouraged!
ForAgainstAbstainPresent
14113
 
Last edited:
Overview
This proposal aims to replace GAR #616 "Contact Rights Between Parent And Child". It requires member states to define "a person's status as having been born to or conceived by unmarried biological parents as an arbitrary, reductive characteristic". It further requires that "no parents may be discriminated against in the granting or revocation of any parental right, duty, or privilege due to said parents' current or former married or unmarried status" and that a member state "may only revoke an individual's status as a legal parent" for a ward (child or mentally diminished individual)'s emotional, mental, or physical wellbeing, or to enforce a prison sentence, amongst other criteria.

Recommendation
Preventing discrimination against the offspring of unmarried parents is a noble course of action. Establishing clear parameters under which revocation of parental status may occur mitigates arbitrary, malicious revocations by relevant authorities. Furthermore, by providing some agency to wards who are capable of articulating reasons for custody revocation, the proposal diminishes the potential harm dependent persons may suffer from the failure to revoke one's status as a parent. These are all laudable pursuits, and their effective execution in this proposal solidifies it as a suitable replacement to GAR #616.

For the above reasons, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote For the General Assembly Resolution at vote, "Marriage And Custody Act".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For obvious reasons, for. Happy to answer questions about this as the author.

While this is more simply detailed in the preamble, this addresses two main issues: discrimination against children of unmarried parents, as well as unmarried parents themselves; and arbitrary/unfair removal of custody. It does this in four ways _

1) It requires member nations to treat being born to unmarried parents as an "arbitrary, reductive charactieristic", and accordingly address hate crime and discrimination based on the status of being born to unmarried parents. I believe that this is important as people born to unmarried parents are very often discriminated against in real life, such as in citizenship laws, honour killings, education, social services, and inheritance laws.

2) It prohibits member nations from discriminating in the granting of any parental right, duty, or privilege based on married or unmarried status, or any other arbitrary, reductive characteristic -- something which still happens in many legal systems, for example in many states in the USA, an unmarried father is not granted any inherent custody rights.

3) By establishing a set of criteria for when a member nation can revoke custody, it prevents member nations from arbitrarily revoking custody where it cannot demonstrate that doing so is necessary to protect the child's wellbeing.

4) It ensures that the child's views are listened to and given "due weight" during procedures of revoking custody of a parent (if able to form and express their own opinion on the matter).
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top