Some convicted paedophiles would lose their parental rights under plans put forward by Harriet Harman, a former deputy leader of the Labour Party.
Ms. Harman, who is standing down as MP for Camberwell and Peckham at the next election, has put forward an amendment to legislation which is going through Parliament.
Currently those convicted of serious sexual offences still have a right to be included when making important decisions about their children’s education, health, and travel.
Some Murderers Also Losing Parental Rights
The so-called Jade’s Law is named after Jade Ward, who was stabbed and strangled to death at her home in Shotton, north Wales, in August 2021 by her partner, Russell Marsh, after she told him she wanted to end their relationship.Under current laws parents have to be consulted on all decisions affecting their children’s health, education, and travel, even if they are convicted murderers and have killed the child’s mother or father.
Marsh was jailed for life for Ms. Ward’s murder but her mother, Karen Robinson, said he demanded school reports and other information about their grandchild while he was in prison.
Announcing Jade’s Law in October, Mr. Chalk said, “No family should have to go through this, and thanks to their efforts, we will protect children and families by making their law a reality.”
Now Ms. Harman has tabled an amendment that would add convicted paedophiles to those who would lose their parental rights.
Her amendment is being supported by Mr. Chalk—who is also the lord chancellor and in charge of the administration of the courts in England and Wales—and is therefore likely to become a reality.
The legislation will only cover those convicted of the rape of a child under 13 and would not include the hundreds of men who are found guilty every year of possessing indecent images of children.
But Ms. Harman said the rule could be “extended” to cover less serious sexual offences against children in the future.
She said the law change was necessary to address a “glaring anomaly” that protects other people’s children from child sex offenders but not their own.
Harman Says Father’s Rights Should Not Trump Child’s Rights
She told BBC Radio 4’s “Today” programme, “It doesn’t protect his own because his rights as a father trump the protection of his own child, which is obviously wrong.”“It’s the rights of the child that should be at the forefront, not the rights of the father. It’s just so glaringly obvious that it’s wrong to protect other people’s children but not protect his own,” added Ms. Harman, who was appointed the first ever minister for women by Sir Tony Blair in 1997.
Ms. Harman said some mothers had been forced to pay for legal action to prevent their children’s fathers influencing their lives after they had been convicted of horrendous crimes.
She said, “It’s the courts and the law that should step forward to protect children, not leave it to the mother, if she can, to go to court.”
When asked why the change had not been enacted before, she blamed an “old hangover of the patriarchy which is that the father somehow has proprietorial rights.”
Ms. Harman said the anomaly had been highlighted after the government’s pilot scheme allowed accredited journalists and legal bloggers to report on family courts cases.
“It was only because there was an opening up of the family courts to allow reporting that this glaring anomaly was brought to the forefront of our attention,” she said.
A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said, “Children’s safety is absolutely paramount and judges can already make orders limiting the parental responsibility of those found guilty of such offences.”
“To further enhance these protections the government will change the law to automatically suspend the parental responsibility of those found guilty of raping a child,” they added.
