Entry Instance

HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "id": 1444324,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1444324/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 134,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "The Senate Majority Leader (",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Part II is the part that I said needs to be brought quite clearly for everybody to appreciate and know that, that is not the case. However, for me, what will pass as a fair law is that if it is known that these are the children of a deceased person, it does not matter from which of the spouses, so long as it has been clearly established that it is a child of the deceased, then let them be treated as one equal family and the property or intestate be shared equally among them. Sen. Veronica Maina will clarify that. In fact, it gives me more doubt and need for clarification on Part IV, where it is described that the share of the surviving child who is not a child of the spouse under subclause (1)(b) (ii) shall be held in accordance with Section 41, and if there is more than one child, they shall share equally. Sen. Veronica Maina, keep this in your notes. What happens if those extra children are more than one from different mothers as well, assuming that the deceased person is a man? The same can happen to women as well because society is evolving. Previously, when legislating and thinking about these issues, many of the time the laws were written with men in mind. However, it is increasingly becoming clear that even women sometimes have intestates that need to be shared, and there might be kids from The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Director, Hansard and AudioServices, Senate."
}