Clause 5 (Hansard, 27 May 1970)

§ The Solicitor-General (Sir Arthur Irvine)
I beg to move Amendment No. 71, in page 5, line 27, at end insert: () any physical or mental disability of the child:.

§ The Temporary Chairman (Mr. George Rogers)
With this Amendment we are to take Amendment No. 11, in page 5, line 32, at end insert: (e) any physical or mental disability suffered by the child.

§ The Solicitor-General
I am glad to move this Amendment, because we are taking account of representations by the right hon. and learned Member for Huntingdonshire (Sir D. Renton), who expressed the view that it was desirable that there should be explicit reference to the case of physical or mental disability of the child as one of the matters to which the court should have regard in exercising its powers under Clause 2 or Clause 4 by virtue of Clause 5(1).
I earlier expressed the view that this important matter might already in the original wording of the Clause have been sufficiently covered by the matters re- 1944 ferred to and the factors mentioned in the original language of Clause 5, but I have come to the conclusion that it is desirable and right that there should be specific reference to the case of a child suffering from physical or mental disability and I have pleasure in recommending this Amendment to the Committee.

§ Sir David Renton (Huntingdonshire)
I am obliged to the right hon. and learned Gentleman for his acceptance of this Amendment, which appeared to be right in the minds of hon. Members on both sides in the Standing Committee. In these days when so much is done by Parliament in an attempt to help those who are physically or mentally handicapped, it seemed to us that it would be wrong to be legislating in the context of this Bill dealing with the position of the children and parties to a marriage when, alas, that marriage breaks up if the courts were not asked to have special regard to the needs of physically or mentally handicapped children.
One point has arisen which I must confess occurred to me only just before this debate started and it gives rise to some anxiety. It would rather appear from at least a superficial reading of Clause 5 in the light of Clauses 2 and 4, and especially Clause 8, that any provision made by the courts in favour of a physically or mentally handicapped child —I use that word advisedly—that in the case of mental handicap of course the word " child " is a very flexible word. There can be a mentally handicapped person of advanced years who may have the mental age of a very young child. It would therefore be a tragedy if a provision made by the court by a court order were to come to an end when that child reaches the age in actual years of life of 18, whichprima faciemight be the position on a strict reading of Clause 8.
I therefore ask the Solicitor-General if he can assure us that any such provision made by the court would not automatically come to an end at the age of 18 and if he can explain that the provision could extend beyond that age.

§ The Solicitor-General
I am grateful to the right hon. and learned Gentleman for having a word with me before this 1945 Committee stage. I think I can satisfy the Committee that the position under the Bill is that a provision of the court, bearing in mind the matters referred to in this Amendment, does not come to an end when the child reaches the age of 18. That is because on a consideration of the language of Clause 8, and particularly subsection (3), one finds that a considerable discretion is granted to the court which, as I interpret it, makes it possible for the court, where the circumstances are regarded as justifying it, to make a provision which will continue to be available after the child has reached the age of 18.

§ Sir D. Renton
That is indeed good news. I only hope that the courts will take the same view of the Clause as that which the right hon. and learned Gentleman has expressed.