Post by applejack on May 2, 2009 17:20:37 GMT -5
tinyurl.com/d7to6o
Couples with children outside wedlock 'should be married by the State'
Couples who have children outside wedlock should be automatically married by the State to discourage them from splitting up, a key government adviser is proposing.
By John Bingham
Last Updated: 9:05PM BST 30 Apr 2009
Prof Julian Le Grand, the architect of a clutch of New Labour policies such as baby bonds, is calling for marriage to be the legal "default" setting for new parents.
Without having to undergo a public ceremony or take any vows, they should simply be regarded as married in law as soon as the child's birth is registered, Prof Le Grand, Tony Blair's former Downing Street health adviser, said.
Those who later decide to separate would have to go to court to seek a divorce in exactly the same way as a couple who had married formally in church or a register office.
The London School of Economics professor, who is also chairman of Health England, argued that the idea would make family units more secure.
Ann Widdecombe, the Conservative MP, rejected it as "ludicrous" and warned that it could spell the death of marriage.
The academic has attracted controversy in the past with calls for smokers to be forced to buy permits before they can buy cigarettes and the introduction of separate supermarket checkouts for alcohol to put people off buying drink.
He advocates the idea of "libertarian paternalism" in which the state is allowed to "nudge" people in what it sees as the right direction for their own good.
Other proposals include requiring companies to organise an "exercise hour" for staff to reduce obesity.
The latest suggestion was outlined in a lecture to the Foundation for Law, Justice and Society, an Oxford University affiliated think tank.
"There would be a benefit to the child as it would make separation that much more difficult," he said.
"There would also be benefits for the woman, particularly, who would acquire rights that many cohabitees think that they have already but actually they don't.
"There are no such things as common law wives although people think that there are."
He acknowledged that there were still some "creases that have to be ironed out" with the idea such as what to do about cases where paternity is not clear or people with children to multiple partners.
He rejected the charge of "nanny state" interference and said he was considering whether there should be an opt-out provision for those who actively oppose the concept of marriage.
Miss Widdecombe dismissed the idea as "ridiculous".
"If two people want to have a child outside wedlock and the state comes along and says 'we will marry you anyway', all you will get is that men won't accept paternity of children," she said.
"It is ludicrous, it would be the final nail in the coffin of marriage."
Couples with children outside wedlock 'should be married by the State'
Couples who have children outside wedlock should be automatically married by the State to discourage them from splitting up, a key government adviser is proposing.
By John Bingham
Last Updated: 9:05PM BST 30 Apr 2009
Prof Julian Le Grand, the architect of a clutch of New Labour policies such as baby bonds, is calling for marriage to be the legal "default" setting for new parents.
Without having to undergo a public ceremony or take any vows, they should simply be regarded as married in law as soon as the child's birth is registered, Prof Le Grand, Tony Blair's former Downing Street health adviser, said.
Those who later decide to separate would have to go to court to seek a divorce in exactly the same way as a couple who had married formally in church or a register office.
The London School of Economics professor, who is also chairman of Health England, argued that the idea would make family units more secure.
Ann Widdecombe, the Conservative MP, rejected it as "ludicrous" and warned that it could spell the death of marriage.
The academic has attracted controversy in the past with calls for smokers to be forced to buy permits before they can buy cigarettes and the introduction of separate supermarket checkouts for alcohol to put people off buying drink.
He advocates the idea of "libertarian paternalism" in which the state is allowed to "nudge" people in what it sees as the right direction for their own good.
Other proposals include requiring companies to organise an "exercise hour" for staff to reduce obesity.
The latest suggestion was outlined in a lecture to the Foundation for Law, Justice and Society, an Oxford University affiliated think tank.
"There would be a benefit to the child as it would make separation that much more difficult," he said.
"There would also be benefits for the woman, particularly, who would acquire rights that many cohabitees think that they have already but actually they don't.
"There are no such things as common law wives although people think that there are."
He acknowledged that there were still some "creases that have to be ironed out" with the idea such as what to do about cases where paternity is not clear or people with children to multiple partners.
He rejected the charge of "nanny state" interference and said he was considering whether there should be an opt-out provision for those who actively oppose the concept of marriage.
Miss Widdecombe dismissed the idea as "ridiculous".
"If two people want to have a child outside wedlock and the state comes along and says 'we will marry you anyway', all you will get is that men won't accept paternity of children," she said.
"It is ludicrous, it would be the final nail in the coffin of marriage."