Whose child is it anyway? It is high time we discard for good, the oppressive cultural values that contradict the human rights gospel our government preaches at home and abroad. It is saddening to learn that the child registration policy tramples on those very rights our government has pledged to uphold in regional and international human rights treaties and conventions on birth registration. According to the United Nations Children''s Fund (UNICEF), Article 7 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child specifies that every child has a right to be registered at birth without any discrimination.
UNICEF further says birth registration, as the official record of a child''s birth by the government, establishes the existence of the child under law and provides the foundation to safeguard many of the child''s civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights.
But, the revelation of obstacles that women are encountering in this country to register children are grossly violating these very rights. What is disturbing is the cultural requirement to have the father present in order for the child to be issued with a birth certificate.
Especially where fathers who are not able to be physically present have given their identity documents to the mothers of their children, yet home affairs officials insist on their physical presence.
What a counterproductive requirement! With so many cases of absentee fathers, it is ironic that home affairs officials are asking for the fathers of these children, whom the children have in some cases never seen. While paternity test results are corruptly falsified, policies surrounding the issue of birth certificates nevertheless demand the presence of the fathers.
We disagree that women must discuss the registration of children of absentee fathers with the family of the father.
If the men duck and dive after impregnating the mother of the child, why can''t the child have the mother''s name? After all it is the woman who carry the pregnancy so, whose child is it anyway?