Australian sex-offender seeks access to IVF

An Australian man is seeking to overturn a ruling barring him and his
partner from accessing IVF on the grounds of his previous conviction in 2003 for
having sex with a 16-year-old student while he was employed as a teacher's aide.

The man, know only as ABY, said he is being denied basic human rights
because he is not allowed to access the treatment. He and his wife had started
IVF before he was arrested and planned to resume it when he was released from
prison. He was jailed for three years with two years suspended.

Under Victorian law, convicted sex-offenders who want IVF must appear before
a review panel before treatment is granted. The panel, however, denied the
couple access to treatment on the grounds of ABY's previous conviction.

The Victorian state Assisted Reproductive Treatment Act requires all IVF
users to undergo police and background checks before they are offered treatment
and operates a presumption against treatment for couples where either partner
has been convicted of a sexual offence. The law was
introduced after the Victorian Law Reform Commission recommended barring people
convicted for sexual or violent offences from IVF on the basis that they
presented a potential risk.

During the hearing at the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal,
forensic psychiatrist Dr Danny Sullivan said the 33-year-old man had 'age
appropriate relationships' throughout his adult life and, in his view, was not
a paedophile or someone with an unnatural interest in post-pubescent girls.

Dr Sullivan said it was 'extremely unlikely' ABY would have difficulty
discerning the boundary between parent and child and there were 'no deficits
that would look like ABY posed a risk to his own children'.

ABY said he was sorry for what he did, but it was wrong to deny
him the chance to have children. 'Every person deserves the right to have a
family', he said. 'People make mistakes. It's just very trying'.

The couple's solicitor, Bianca Moleta, said the review panel had breached
her clients' rights. 'By virtue of the Charter of Human Rights the decision
reach by the panel is unlawful', she said. 'As they're a public authority they
need to consider human rights and in the decision and they didn't do that'. Moleta
says the panel breached his human rights to health as well as the right not to
be punished twice.

However, Victorian Opposition health spokesman, Gavin Jennings, has defended
the review panel. 'We have question marks about whether you would be a good
parent because you have a sexual conviction', he told ABY. The tribunal has also
heard that ABY had a history of drug and alcohol dependence.