“A jailed 45-year-old welfare cheat who wants another child claims her human rights have been breached because she has been refused access to fertility treatment. … The case is being run by six barristers and six solicitors with much of the legal bill being picked up by taxpayers.” [Melbourne Herald-Sun]
4 Comments
Debbie Mortimer, SC, told the Supreme Court on Tuesday that significant psychological harm had been caused to Kimberley Castles, who was having self-financed IVF treatment before she was jailed last November.
I beg to differ.
Castles is serving an 18-month minimum term for fraudulently claiming almost $140,000 in single-parent welfare benefits between 1984 and 1998, and then claiming further benefits under a false name between 2000 and 2006.
while there may be a constitutional right to procreate there is no constitutional right to have the taxpayers pay for you to have kids. Just like the first amendment provides for the right to free speech no court has ever required the government to buy you a radio station to facilitate your desires to speak out.
Okay, I have always thought “barrister” and “solicitor” were interchangeable terms. Can anyone clarify?
In the UK a solicitor is a lawyer who can deal with all legal matters except trying a case in court. A barrister is a lawyer who can try a case in court.