House of Assembly Fifty-First Parliament, Second Session (51-2) 51 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Bills Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration (Registration of Deaths) Amendment Bill BIRTHS, DEATHS AND MARRIAGES REGISTRATION (REGISTRATION OF DEATHS) AMENDMENT BILL Introduction and First Reading Introduction and First Reading The Hon. I.F. EVANS House of Assembly Davenport The Hon. I.F. EVANS (Davenport) (10:31): Obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act 1996. Read a first time. Second Reading Second Reading The Hon. I.F. EVANS House of Assembly Davenport The Hon. I.F. EVANS (Davenport) (10:31): I move: That this bill be now read a second time. I bring this bill before the house as the result of contact from a constituent who, after living in a de facto relationship for 15 years, suffered the unfortunate death of her partner. On the death of her partner she approached the government department to have her name registered on the death certificate and was declined. The reason for that is the act does not provide for it. This bill seeks to amend the appropriate act so that, in future, those de facto partners who endure the unfortunate event of losing a partner will have the opportunity to have their name registered on the death certificate. I will read some of the letter that I received from my constituent, because I think it encapsulates the problem very well. This is part of a letter that my constituent wrote to the registrar. It states: I write seeking your indulgence after the sudden death of the above-named, my de facto spouse of some 15 years. My request is that I be included, along with my partner's first wife, in the marriage details. During those 15 years my partner and I resided at the above address. I was known to many by his last name and am the major beneficiary of my partner's estate. Documentary evidence of jointly purchased property, joint bank accounts and joint self-managed superannuation fund can be provided. These, along with longstanding lawful recognition of a de facto spouse, form the basis of my wish to be named. The letter goes on. Then, in a separate letter to me, my constituent makes these points: For me, the exclusion of my name came as a shock, and no doubt affects many people during their bereavement who feel additionally hurt when a longstanding, loving relationship is negated. One cannot sufficiently explain to others the added grief arising from the omission. While friends and relatives suggest that it really doesn't matter, the gesture of bringing this bill into the parliament helps raise the problem and its significance. The death certificate also has a practical value. I have been asked on a surprising number of occasions, such as changing biller details and ownership to my name, to send a certified copy of the death certificate. Needless to say, an embarrassing explanation follows as to why my name is not recorded but the former wife's is. I think that sets out the case for this sensible change. Parliaments have recognised de facto relationships in all sorts of ways. It seems to me that de facto partners should not go through the pain this particular person has endured. It is a simple measure and I hope the government can find the compassion and goodwill to support the bill. Debate adjourned on motion of Mrs Geraghty.