A poem for equality

I'd love to be regarded as just a person but in Northern Ireland I am not.
The DUP look on me as a dirty blood, my doctors have a different thought.
The DUP call me as promiscuous, but partners would tell them otherwise
The DUP say I'm not child safe, despite niece and nephew's smiles.
The DUP think I'm anti-Christian, yet I have a faith just like they themselves espouse.
Yet even my church can't judge me on faith alone because of being gay I suppose.
I've been called "one of them" by the new health minister to my face,
Yet when we meet at family gatherings it can be he looks ill at ease

Sadly not all people are equal with each other here in Northern Ireland,
Not just with those around you but 'cross England, Wales and Scotland
Those who claim to support the union and keep us all as British
When if comes to our equality they act with anger and are skittish.
Because from their view point as white and male, protestant heterosexuals
Though loyal they claim to the Queens, to queens they act abysmal.
They life a live of privilege tell us they stand for equality
Yet their failure to deliver on that is plain for all to see.

You see when you place a petition of concern and fight our equality in courts
It clear that those words are hollow, we look past such words to your thoughts.
And there the truth is all to clear, other words ring through our ears
Because you still want to save Ulster from Sodomy after all these years.
Yet what you fear is that we actually are normal just like you
Want families and weddings and to not to stand out in a queue
Unless of course we want to, but that's a valid choice as well
So don't cover up our frustrations as "everything's going swell".
We live, we eat, we vote, we sleep, we serve you and your kin
Yet to treat us as your equals when will that walk begin.

To tell us we should expect not to be served, for others freedom of conscience,
That fighting for our equality can be discriminated against. Hence,
When we face a hurdle, that you and some of faith place in our way
We'll reach out those those with a stronger voice to let us have our say.
To challenge privilege you want to hold on to for a few, elect, the chosen ones.
Yet some of us are friends, your servers, family, daughters, sons?

So while we wait for you to enact on adoption, allow us a family life,
We'll carry on the fight for husband to wed husband and wife to take a wife.
While you take the blood of anyone when supplies are running low,
It's irrational that when MSM meet criteria that's fine elsewhere you still say no.
By your actions they shall know you, is what the good book proclaims
Your actions aren't loving when on equality all there is is shame.

So listen to what we're saying, look at the evidence science lights upon,
You've not stifle our cries of "unfair" the fight for equality rumbles on.


© 2014 Stephen Glenn 

Footnote This poem started to write itself in my head during the whole Ashers debate, it came to a head when Nelson McCausland wrote this opinion piece in the Belfast Telegraph. Some of the words on this then became an adaptation of my own comments.


 ,

Can Peter Robinson please define bonkers?

So last night Northern Ireland's First Minister Peter Robinson said of the decision of the Equality Commission to consider taking legal action against Ashers:

"This kind of decision from the Equality Commission is bonkers. They really do need to wind their necks in. 

"In times when we are scrapping around trying to get funding for essential services for Northern Ireland, they are tossing it away."

No forgive me it I am wrong but there were recent cuts to services announced in health care provision, which is run by one of his party's ministers, whose predecessor has run up large legal bills to try and prevent gay couples from adopting, this was lost in the supreme court in October 2013. That department is also pursuing legal appeals against a decision that the lifetime ban on Men who've had Sex with Men (MSM) is irrational and should also come into line with the rest of the UK.

Yes, you see there is a department that is scrapping around trying to get funding for essential service that has been tossing it away trying to prevent equality.

So I ask Peter Robinson which is  bonkers?

Is it seeking a ruling on something that there is clearly some dispute on, or ignoring or refusing to acknowledge judicial rulings until all levels of appeal are expended at the public's expense?

What is Edwin saying? part 456

Today in Stormont the Health Minister was taking questions, this one came from the Alliance's Trevor Lunn MLA for Lagan Valley.

Mr Lunn asked the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety, given his responsibilities, whether he still holds the view, expressed by him and by members of his party, that homosexuality is an illness treatable by medical or psychiatric means. 

Mr Poots: I do not think that I ever said that.

Maybe his comments back in 2005 that is was unnatural in the first instance and abominable in the second instance are the comment that sprung to mind.


Mr Lunn: I will try to find the reference for him.  I will ask the same question again:  does he think that homosexuality is an illness treatable by medical or psychiatric means or does he think that, as has been expressed by another Member of his party, it is an abomination? (Editor: Actually Trevor was being polite here as the minister himself said it while he was only a councillor)

Mr Poots: I do not think that it is an illness, in the first instance.  (Editor: Just immoral and an abomination, eh?) I think that many people have various elements to their lives.  When it comes to sexuality, many people who are heterosexual desire lots of other folks, and those of us who are married should not be doing that, so people can resist urges.  I encourage people to take a sensible, rational view on these issues.  I know that there have been a number of challenges about me and the various stances that I take.  I will make it very clear that my stance on blood safety is purely about safety. 

When it comes to my stance on adoption, I have just come from a midwifery-led unit in Lagan Valley, and all the people who were giving birth in that unit were women, and all those women were not impregnated by other women.  So, whether one believes in God or in evolution, the natural order is for a man and a woman to have a child.  (Editor: Can he be sure that non of them were the result of IVF therapy or that some of them weren't in a same-sex relationship to raise the child?) Therefore, that has made my views on adoption and raising children very clear; it should be a man and a woman who raise a child.  People can criticise me for that, and they can challenge me for that and say that it is backward.  The truth is that still today, in this modern era, it is only a man and a woman who can produce a child.  Therefore, it is in the best order for a man and a woman to raise a child.

Now the sentence:

"When it comes to sexuality, many people who are heterosexual desire lots of other folks, and those of us who are married should not be doing that, so people can resist urges."

 throws up a number of interesting questions as to what does the minister mean.

Is it saying that homosexuals should resist their urges? Is he saying that all married heterosexuals are faithful? Is he saying that all homosexuals are promiscuous? What is also interesting that when being asked about the medical or psychiatric state of homosexual, Poots immediately transposes that into adoption. That is almost as if he is subliminally linking the two.


There is a lot of stuff that is left unsaid. There is also a lot in there that is not actually an accurate reflection of the heterosexual community which clearly Mr Poots has more personal experience of. This therefore casts doubt on his ability to understand fully another section which he claims to not have interaction with and is solely relying what he reads or hears about that community. 

The other thing is his 100% assertion that all the women in the Lagan Valley hospital were not impregnated by a woman. If they were giving birth as a result of IVF it is possible that a woman may have introduced the sperm to the egg and  implanted the fertilised egg into the womb. This is a scientific possibility these days. I have no doubt that all the people giving birth in that unit were women. However, I would suggest that not every woman in that maternity unit every day will be rising that child with the child's sperm provider. 

Indeed I reckon that if Edwin Poots looks through his own family history he will discover that not everyone in it was consistently raised by a man and a woman. There will have been times that the mother died in childbirth and the father raised the children, or maybe the father died before the child was born and maybe the child was raised by its widowed mother and her widowed mother. This is what is perfectly natural and has happened throughout history.

What is in the best order for a child however, is that is it raised in a loving family from as early a stage as possible. The longer a child remains in the care system the more it will suffer academically and developmentally. By delaying dealing with the promised children and adoption bill because of his fight over allowing unmarried and same sex couples to adopt he is hurting those children. Northern Ireland is proportionately slower at placing children the UK average is 69% within 12 months but only 55% in Northern Ireland.

That figures needs to come down, the 4% of adoptions that take place with same-sex couples in the rest of the UK may not be matched here in Northern Ireland, but when you add in unmarried couples adopting together that figure probably would be surpassed and make inroads into the suitable homes for placements.

I will however return to the fact that Mr Poots immediately turned this question and the supplementary into a answer about adoption. As I said above he almost makes a subliminal link between the two. It is almost as if the reason he will not allow same-sex couples to adopt IS because he thinks homosexuality is an illness treatable by medical or psychiatric means and therefore until treated those individuals should not be allowed to adopt.

To therefore start with a first instance of "I do not think that it is an illness" before going on to blood and adoption something that was not asked in this instance is a case of the Minister answering what he thought he was being asked not what he actually was. By carrying on he has actually accentuated his own prejudices, his own lack of understanding of what is going on in heterosexual relationships and in birthing methods. All of which come under his remit.
 

Dear Edwin, What about the rights of the child?

I'm back on the subject of the Northern Ireland Health Minister, Edwin Poots, so soon after my previous comments. But then if he will say:

"It is not a human right to adopt a child for either a mixed-sex couple or a same-sex couple."

While this is not enshrined in any version of human rights anywhere the United Nations have a Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Article 3 (Best interests of the Child) states:

With regard to decisions that affect a child, his/her best interests should be taken into consideration.  This provision extends to legal and administrative decisions.  When parents, elected officials, and other adults make decisions, they should think about what impact their choices and actions will have on children.

Article 20 (Protection for Children without Families):

Governments should provide appropriate, alternative care for children who cannot be looked after by their own families.  Examples include guardianship, kinship care, foster placement, and adoption.  It is within the best interest of children to be looked after by people who respect their ethnic, religious, cultural, and linguistic background.

Article 21 (Adoption):

Children have the right to a family.  However, certain circumstances prevent a child from living with their families, such as children who have been orphaned or whose families are unable to care for them.  In these instances, children may be eligible for adoption.  Children should only be adopted if it is within their best interest.

So while Mr Poots may be right that nobody has the right to adopt a child, the child does have the right and the onus is on the Government to ensure that as far as possible the child has the right to a family, and that is achievable via adoption. No where in the UN Convention on the Right of the Child does it stipulate that the family has to consist of one father and one mother however.

So Mr Poots while you are arguing against people having the right to adopt, what about the rights of the children who languish unadopted in Northern Ireland to the right to a family.

Northern Ireland gay couple find a way to adopt

Edwin Poots, the Northern Irish Health Minister, must think of King Canute as something of a personal hero. There he is going through every layer of court that the land and Europe has to offer to try and stem the tide of change on whatever issue of LGBT equality he is trying to stop.

Well there is a little chink in his armour, a small wave has beaten through his defenses and there is a gay couple in Northern Ireland who have adopted two little boys. Their social worker helped them out, saying that while they wanted to adopt from within Northern Ireland that path was one that was closed to them, but there was other options. What they did was to go to England and adopt two boys from there which they did at the start of the summer and who have started primary school last month.

However, this does not deal with the hardship of the many children in Northern Ireland who are still looking for a family to adopt them. Nor does this route help those children of one partner in a same-sex relationship be adopted by the other spouse.

The irony as ever in Northern Ireland is that those who speak out loudest against same-sex couples adopting are also those who speak loudly against abortion. Therefore they are wanting to create a case of more unwanted children while at the same time not allowing some people who want those children the ability to adopt them. While both abortion and same-sex adoption are not allowed in Northern Ireland there are two ways hardship can hit children here in Northern Ireland. They can be unwanted when they are born, and find that those who want themThose who claim to speak up for the rights of the child should really look at what is best for the child who they so desperately want to keep alive.

The cost of the DUP's institutionalised homophobia

Most of the UK is aware of the austerity measures that are being imposed on them due to the financial issues we have faced since 2008. Cuts have been made to excessive and unnecessary spending in a whole manner of issues. Tough decisions have been made about what front line services are to be kept and front line services like education and health are afforded protection.

However, in Northern Ireland the Minister for Health has been using his limited, if protected budget, on the institutionalised homophobia. I am not mincing my words on this as I have called the way that the DUP have gone about preventing the LGBT population of Northern Ireland having the same rights as their peers in the rest of the UK is just that.

Earlier this week we heard that after the High Court in Belfast has found that excluding some would-be parents solely on their relationship status narrowed the pool of potential adopters and could not be in the best interests of children. Edwin Poots however was not happy after all the legal fees he had spent on fighting this, which came out of the Health Department's budget, and will be spending even more on Lawyers as he takes the matter of same sex couples adopting in Northern Ireland to the Supreme Court of the UK.

There is a certain irony here as the Health Minister had called for an all Island approach to adoption, and is taking it to the Supreme Court of the jurisdiction where there already is just what the High Court in Belfast have said. In all likelihood the Supreme Court will uphold the right of UK citizens to have the same rights as all the others, so will that mean more money being thrown after the £40,000 he has spent on this already.

Then yesterday the Belfast Telegraph reported that combined with the legal advise to prevent the lifting of the lifetime ban on men who have had sex with other men his total legal costs so far are £100,000.

The below are the answers received last week, costs are exclusive of VAT.

• Costs of appeal to adoption decision
• Costs to date of blocking lifting lifetime blood ban on men who have had sex with men

The other face of UKIP child care prejudice

Can't be good for Nigel Farage as he is attacked Rotherham Social Services for removing three foster children from members of his party in one by election constituency when in another, Croydon North, his candidate says:

"If you couldn’t look after your child and you had to put them up for adoption would you honestly want your child to be adopted by a gay couple?
 
"Would you seriously want that or a heterosexual family? Which would be more healthy for the child?

"A caring loving home is a heterosexual or single family. I don’t believe (a gay couple) is healthy for a child."

So, do UKIP really care about the fact that children will be brought up in a stable environment? Or are they really letting their prejudices rise to the fore?

There is of course no evidence that a child adopted or raised by a same-sex couple is any worse off for a child. The child's health is not at risk (even though I suspect this is a misuse of the word healthy). Indeed there has been studies done which indicate that there may actually be some advantages for the children adopted by a same-sex couple over those with natural parents who are unable to provide the care most of us would expect.

Mind you here is that same candidate standing as an independent for Croydon's Mayoral election 4 years ago:




Update: Mr McKenzie has since gone further and called adoption by same-sex couples child abuse saying:

"I am having you adopted by two men who kiss regularly but don't worry about it' – that is abuse. It is a violation of a child's human rights because that child has no opportunity to grow up under normal circumstances."

How did the Northern Irish parties respond to adoption judicial review

I'm leaving this blog post largely in the words of the various parties in their own words as to how they have responded to today's judicial review on adoption here in Northern Ireland.

The DUP have nothing on their own website but speaking to the BBC the Health Minister Edwin Poots has said:

"It is my intention to urgently appeal this judgment and I am taking this action with a heavy heart.

"I have already publicly declared my intention to reform Northern Ireland adoption law because reform is much needed and long overdue.

"This judicial review has already delayed plans to introduce a new Adoption and Children Bill in the Assembly and I fear that this will lead to further delay."

Sinn Féin said:

Sinn Féin MLA Sue Ramsey said she is disappointed by the Health Minister’s decision to appeal a High Court ruling that a ban on gay and unmarried couples is unlawful.

The West Belfast MLA and Chair of the Health Committee at the Assembly said:

"This is a disappointing decision by the Health Minister Edwin Poots considering that our laws on adoption where out of date and not reflective of modern society and life-styles.

"The primary focus when it comes to adoption has to be the welfare of the child. It has to be the determining factor and guiding principle when it comes to anyone adopting a child.

"A single person or unmarried couple should be able to adopt a child, regardless of their sexuality, providing they can provide a stable, caring home with the child’s best interests at the heart of that decision.

"This extension of the eligibility criteria in line with modern society will significantly reduce the number of children in care." 

 SDLP said:

SDLP Health Spokesperson Conall McDevitt has welcomed this morning's ruling that the current bar on unmarried couples and civil partners adopting is unlawful and has called for a legislative remedy.

The South Belfast MLA was speaking after Mr Justice Treacy's decision to grant the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission a judicial review into current arrangements regarding adoption.

He said:

"Mr Justice Treacy's ruling is very welcome and a positive move forward towards creating uniform equality on adoption across these islands.

"This ruling, however, is only one step forward. If full adoption equality is to be achieved and Northern Ireland’s arrangements are to be made lawful, in line with Britain, a legislative framework must be drafted and brought forward for ratification without delay."

The Alliance Party said:

Alliance Health spokesperson Kieran McCarthy MLA has welcomed the court ruling that stated that the ban on unmarried couples from adopting was illegal. He said that this was great progress and would allow unmarried and same sex couples to adopt.
 
Kieran McCarthy MLA said:

"This is a tremendous victory and a great day for progress. The ban on unmarried couples adopting was illogical and wrong. The only issue that should matter is the needs of the child and not a blanket ban on certain groups from adopting. This is an issue of equality, so I am glad that the correct decision was reached

"The previsous rules did not make sense. Only one member of an unmarried couple could previously have legally adopted a child which could have resulted in the other partner having no rights to the child if the legal parent died.

"We have far too many children waiting to be adopted for us to be picking and choosing who we think should be able to adopt.

"This ruling will obviously result in unmarried and same sex couple being able to adopt which I fully support. I would urge any unmarried or same sex couple who believes that they would be able to provide a stable home to a child to consider applying to adopt a child."

Traditional Unionist Voice have said:

Commenting on Treacy J's ruling in favour of same sex adoption, TUV Leader Jim Allister said he was disappointed with the outcome and hoped the Attorney General and Department would appeal.

"There was, in my view, inadequate attention to the paramount benefit to the child of adoption within a regular family unit of a father and a mother and unwarranted equivalence of such to the unnatural setting of a same sex relationship. Once more we see the human rights mantra being exploited to further divorce the law from the moral expectations and norms of the society it exists to serve."

The Ulster Unionist have said nothing on their website.

The mixed up world for Northern Irish foetuses

Here is the world facing the unborn in Northern Ireland in one day....today.

The Marie Stopes clinic in Belfast opened, offering abortion under the tighter that the rest of the UK regulations on who qualifies, to protests (pictured).

The High Court rules that same-sex couples being banned from adopting in Northern Ireland is unlawful.

Despite there being insufficient suitable placements for those currently looking to be adopted the health minister has said that he will challenge that ruling.

Now I suspect that many of those protesting and insisting that the women who wish to abort in Northern Ireland go full term (as well as the over 1000 a year who do not meet the regulations and go elsewhere) would probably support the Health Minister in his challenge. It is the sort of argument that the religiosity of the Pro-Lifers in Northern Ireland would stretch to. So yeah that is the mixed up world an unborn child may face here in Northern Ireland.

The choice a women faces is abide by the 9 weeks gestation rule and only if health physical or mental to the mother is as risk and abort, go elsewhere in the UK, go full term and give up for adoption in an under subscribed field with many not getting adopted. So if the women protested for Pro-Life really want the best for every unborn child have they really thought through all the consequences.

I suspect they haven't, but I also suspect that each women who finds herself pregnant that exercises her own choice without prejudice or judgement from others has considered all the options very carefully based on the reality of their own situation.

Update: No sooner had I posted this than I noticed that BBC NI political editor Mark Devenport was looking at today's events along similar lines.

Update 2: BBC report on the adoption story