Oral Answers to Questions — Public Health. – in the House of Commons at on 29 June 1939.
Miss Rathbone:
asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that a statutory declaration of conscientious objection to vaccination made by the wife of a labourer in the Royal Arsenal, Woolwich, on behalf of her child, was recently refused by the vaccination officer of the Metropolitan borough of Woolwich on the ground that only the declaration of the father of the child could be accepted, he having its legal custody; that in this case the father was prevented from making a declaration owing to his hours of work being from 8.20 a.m. to 6 p.m., and that in many other cases the father may be prevented by illness, mental disability, or temporary absence from home; and whether he will consider making such a change in the regulations as will enable the mother to make the declaration?
My attention has not previously been drawn to this case. The statutory declaration may be made before either a commissioner for oaths or a justice of the peace at any time. I cannot, therefore, accept the contention that the father concerned was prevented from making such a declaration because of his hours of work. I do not consider it necessary to propose the amendment of the law which the hon. Member suggests.
Miss Rathbone:
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this refusal to acknowledge the statutory declaration of the mother is not only practically inconvenient in many cases but is an insult to the mother, and is quite inconsistent with the spirit of the declaration and of the Custody of Children Act; and will not the Government consider taking action, if necessary in the way of legislation, to give equal rights to the father and mother in this matter?
That was not the point that the hon. Lady put to me in the question.
What is the value of the statutory declaration? Should it not be sufficient if the form is filled in?
I have to have regard to the Act of Parliament, the same as anybody else.