Our children’s future is now in the balance

May 23 2008 by Valerie Hill, Liverpool Daily Post

DO WE need dads? It’s a thorny question given the huge change in the social and gender revolution.

But it seems as far as Parliament is concerned, the answer is no. The requirement for a fertility doctor to consider a child’s need for a male role model before allowing women IVF treatment was scrapped by MPs this week.

While the feelings and beliefs of those involved must be considered, but paramount in all of this are the needs of the child.

And I often wonder if we’re doing enough to prop up the beleaguered traditional model of parenting involving a mum and dad.

At times it seems as if the nuclear family is about to explode. Yet as any parent or carer will I’m sure agree, given that the population consists 50% each of men and women, familiarity with both sexes is an advantage in life. There’s another thing I’ve noticed. As they grow up, children sway in their bias from father to mother, back and forth over the years, as if finding their level.

I’m not for a moment decrying the huge effort any single parent puts into bringing up children. Women, especially, have done a fantastic job bringing up children single-handedly in wartime or when they’ve prematurely lost their partners.

Neither would I suggest that anybody should stay in an abusive relationship, exposing themselves and their children to mental or physical cruelty. What I’m talking about is an ideal that is worth aiming at. And I’m just so relieved that in my case there are two of us to share the burden – and the joy – taking care of our two sons as they set out in life.

The Commons free vote swept away the rule that a child’s need for a male role model must be considered, with 292 votes for the change and 217 against, a majority of 75.

A second vote to underline the need for a father or male role model failed, too. Under the new legislation doctors only have to consider a child’s need for “supportive parenting”.

This is no superficial matter. Talking to people in education and organisations like the YMCA, they cite family breakdown again and again as the root of so many other ills.

Anyone who has witnessed gangs of feral children roaming the streets (ie all of us) surely consider that the problems these youths cause, and the long-term damage to themselves, would be greatly lessened if each had a concerned mother and father back home.

Dr John Sentamu, the Archbishop of York goes even further, warning it would vanquish the father from the centre of the family.

The Government was kow-towing to the wishes of “consumers” who want to become parents, rather than considering the children’s welfare, he said. John Baker, Families Need Fathers chairman, says: “We believe this change sends out an extremely worrying message that makes fathers redundant in the upbringing of children.”

However PM Gordon Brown says that the bill was not an attack on fathers, but it was intended to help people “to approach IVF clinics without fear of discrimination on the grounds of their sexual orientation.”

In response to this, Labour rebel Geraldine Smith, MP, said there was no evidence that any lesbian or single women had ever been denied IVF treatment because of the “need for a father” clause.

Of course, these free votes are always fascinating. They allow the real feelings of our MPs to show, rather than behaving tactically to safeguard their career or ambitions.

Ms Smith acquits herself rather well. She goes on: “I can’t see what harm is being done by saying to a lesbian couple or a single woman going for IVF, ‘Can you consider the need for a father or a potential father figure?’

“It may be a grandfather. It may be a relative. Even having that discussion must do some good.

“This is about common sense and what is in the best interests of the child and, yes, fathers do have a role to play.”

As Geraldine Smith adds: “Is there any wonder people think politicians are out of touch with ordinary people when we have debates such as this?”

Besides, don’t politicians realise it’s always handy to have a husband to blame things on?