Natasha Stott Despoja (SA, Australian Democrats) Share this | Hansard source

I move Democrats amendment (2) on revised sheet 4866:

(2)    Schedule 1, page 4 (line 2) to page 34 (line 7), omit “equal shared parental responsibility” (wherever occurring), substitute “joint parental responsibility”.

This amendment changes any references in the legislation from ‘equal shared parental responsibility’ to ‘joint parental responsibility’. As has been commented on in the speeches in the second reading debate and in the Senate committee stage, the use of the term ‘equal’ has been of concern. It has been criticised widely. It is quite a divisive term in some respects, in that it focuses more on parents’ rights than on our responsibilities as parents. Parental responsibility should not be quantified. Children need qualitative approaches to parenting.

The Democrats feel that the use of the word ‘joint’ sends a clearer message to parents about a cooperative approach to parenting—where possible of course—instead of dividing them and pitching them against each other in a battle to be the winner in negotiations over their children. The intent of this legislation, as I understood it, was to try and provide a less adversarial approach and so less adversarialism in the system when it came to the issue of parental responsibility. I think that joint parental responsibility encapsulates that less adversarial approach much better than the terminology of equal. One seems to imply a quantitative approach as opposed to a qualitative approach, which is what we should be aiming for if our focus in this legislation is indeed the best interests of the children.