[ad_1]
The Council of Ministers on Friday approved Justice Minister Koen Geens' draft bill to allow parents to register, on a voluntary basis, " their lifeless child from 140 days after fertilization ". Parents may also " give a name to their child ", according to a statement from the Minister. It is a symbolic recognition, not creating legal effects, aimed at meeting the need of parents wanting to get the state to take into account their mourning.
Currently, it is only from 180 days of pregnancy that a diet is planned. This one is of another type. A " Declaration Obligation " is in effect, the child being given a first name. The new law adds to the declaration requirement the " possibility " to grant a family name from 180 days. This obligation of declaration implies the recognition of the status of lifeless child, the obligation of funeral and the granting of a birth allowance.
" In the eyes of many parents, their child born lifeless is indeed a child, like all other children, and they ask to be able to give this child a place in their life by registering it, if necessary on an optional basis, in the database of children. acts of civil status and having the possibility to give them a surname or first name ", stresses Koen Geens.
" The period of 180 days is obsolete with regard to neonatalogy. the development of medical science and the World Health Organization, a child may be born viable after a pregnancy of at least 140 days ", adds Minister CD & V.
The latter mentions the need to legislate in pointing the contrast with rela legislation funerals and burials under the jurisdiction of the Communities and Regions. In Flanders, it is permitted to bury from the first day. In Brussels and Wallonia, the authorization runs from the 106th day after fertilization.
This file was pending in parliament for twenty years. It was a decisive change on Tuesday, when the majority of the world reached an agreement to introduce a bill to organize the end of the voluntary abortion of the Penal Code.
Contrasting reactions [19659008] In a statement, MP Sonja Becq (CD & V), who had tabled a bill on the subject, and even an amendment proposing recognition from 12 weeks of lost pregnancy, welcomed the developments Friday. " That their baby dies before, during or after the pregnancy makes little difference to the parents.The child is born and is fully part of the family, even if his little heart no longer beats. recognition, including from the state ", she said.
For the N-VA, the agreement is a step in the right direction but we could have gone further . For MP Goedele Uyttersprot, " the registration of the family name should be able to intervene from the first day ". According to her, " grief does not begin on day 180. Parents worry much earlier about the new life that will fill their families ."
The MR Group in the House of Commons highlighted a breakthrough guaranteeing free choice of parents and the right to abortion. " It seemed essential to us to be able to guarantee the free choice of the parents, so that those who wish it could pbad through this painful ordeal under the best conditions ," said group leader David Clarinval. " Moreover, the MR did what the law could not lead to the recognition of a legal personality for the lifeless child.This was for us an intangible guarantee for the right to abortion, whether performed within the legal period or beyond for medical reasons ", he added.
On the benches of the opposition, the cdH welcomed the government initiative . Recalling that the cdH had also brought this issue for 10 years, the group leader in the House, Catherine Fonck, was pleased that one would " allow (not oblige) recognition of children born lifeless" to take into account the suffering of the parents, without imposing anything.
In secular community circles, such a development worries about the future rights it would give birth to. pressure on the right to voluntary abortion.Fears are also expressed as to a possible limitation of research on embryos.
The Center for Action Secular (CAL) considers that the lowering of the 180-day term to 140 days, even a symbolic one, is a false debate when the fetus is not viable, so in the state of science it can not be a child. If the WHO has mentioned a 140-day period, it is only 'for statistical purposes,' he stresses, 'to badyze and better prevent fetal mortality worldwide. According to the WHO, this is not a criterion of viability in the medical sense. Far from humanizing mourning, such measures could prove "harmful to the psychological health of women as well as to their social and professional life," says CAL. For him, the law must allow mourning, not impose it.
[ad_2]
Source link
