Transgender man gives birth and wants to be recorded as baby's father

Just realised I said your people and hormones I meant to say young!

To be VERY clear, in no way do I endorse eugenics or the notion that "breeding" (your term) should be restricted, limited, etc. I believe in something called informed consent. Adult human beings are capable of making their own decisions that not only affect their lives, but yes, their children's as well. (As parents, we do that every day.) I would love to see more research that could give individuals better information about the risks their choices pose to themselves and their offspring. For example, if it could be determined that after a certain number of years on testosterone, the risk of a birth defect was increased by X%, a woman could better decide what to do--freeze eggs before starting hormones, use a donor, or forego pregnancy. It is still her choice. Some choices are selfish and misguided, but that is not my decision to make.

My point is that research and discussion of this appears to be non-existent. Just as with the treatment of transgender adolescents and children, I feel it is imperative to put aside political correctness here and get some real factual data. Whatever the truth might end up being.

(And otherwise, I actually agreed with a lot of what you said.)

blah - no, the adoption record is only sealed in terms of people who have no legitimate interest in knowing being able to have a look at the records. They aren't literally sealed and never opened again. And - crucially - there is a full official record that says that baby Suzy Jones was born to Sarah Jones (mother) and Simon Smith (father) and subsequently adopted by Olenna Wimple and Olenna WimpleDH (names obviously made up).

My DD's short birth certificate looks like anyone else's but her long certificate is a copy of a certified entry in the adoption register. I haven't given it much thought, but I'm sure the clever people who work on this sort of thing could come up with a process that records that baby Suzy Jones was born to Simon Smith (mother) and Sarah Jones (father) but the parents wish to be recognised as Simon Smith (father) and Sarah Jones (mother).

(I'm assuming both of "Suzy's" parents are trans, to make things easier in this example)

It's another part of their life that we (rightly) have no idea on so none of us should assume.

But medical people do know so should be able to warn them of any risks.

@OlennasWimple if the record is sealed as it is with adoption , would we not be in same position ?

@Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g I do partially agree with what you say about your people and hormones. Though I don't think it should be stopped just only done as well informed adults never to children. This person may have delayed taking them in order to have children and only transitioned socially or frozen their eggs. It's another part of their life that we (rightly) have no idea on so none of us should assume.

Surely it must be possible to construct a system similar to the issuing of birth certificates to adoptive parents, where the bio parents are named on the original birth certificate but a new certificate is issued once the court process is complete and parental responsibility has passed to the adoptive parents? So parents who have legally transitioned could be recognised on an official certificate as "father" despite gestating and delivering the child, but there is still an accurate official record of the child's parents

Also,I have seen someone question the quality of a woman's eggs after she has been taking testosterone for a while. There must be a significant number of people who have lifestyles that damage their eggs. Suggesting they shouldn't be allowed to breed is stepping into eugenics territory which again is pretty distasteful.

I don't think that's distasteful nor do I think it's in eugenics territory. It doesn't matter to me what the lifestyle, environmental or genetic factors are that may have affected a woman's eggs (or a man's sperm) - if doctors know that this may affect her/him, she/he must be told, and I would hope this would lead to some very serious thought before embarking on a pregnancy, for the sake of the child who might have to deal with serious health issues. Also for the sake of the wider family who would be affected too. This is surely just the same as someone who knows a serious illness runs in the family (e.g. Huntingdon's or cystic fibrosis) and has to consider what to do.

I would also say it's yet another reason why, weighing up all the pros and cons, a child with gender dysphoria shouldn't be put on puberty blockers and a young teenager shouldn't get cross hormones (the latter doesn't happen on the NHS but does happen in other parts of the world and some teenagers are buying hormones on the internet and self-medicating). The child/teenager can't possibly be mature enough to understand the consequences of taking those drugs on their future fertility.

Perhaps Terfsup was just agreeing with y statement and essentially including herself as a person who expects logic and reason? Not attacking anyone?

Yes. I grinned because I recognised myself in your statement, GeorgeFayne.

*distressing not distressful ... probably loads of other typos :/

I think this is interesting. But I have to say accusing the parent here of being narcissistic and saying the child will be lied to and should be removed or put on at risk register is ... well I think some of It hasn't been thought through.

Rather than considering that this persons feelings about being trans might not be genuine because they did such a "female" function, why are we not inclined to think that the drive to be a parent was so strong in this person that they were willing to undergo a distressful process which may have affected their mental health (dysphoria). Wouldn't this mean the child was badly wanted and therefore they would have really thought about the decision compared with an "oops" baby? Ive heard people say ivf couples are more likely to have really considered and invested time and finance into becoming parents therefore more likely to be good parents , could this situation not have the same vibe?

Next I think it's worth considering how truthful birth certificates are and WHY we feel uncomfortable about this type of "lie" when we accept other lies.

A lesbian couple for example , can both be named as parents on a birth certificate in the uk according to this : www.gov.uk/register-birth/who-can-register-a-birth
Please correct me if I've misunderstood this, but assuming I haven't we know it's physically impossible for two women to conceive , so why is this type of lie ok but the trans person is not? Is it just because people feel the birth mother being on there is so important ? Does anyone think the lesbians will automatically lie to the child and claim no man was involved in conception like some posters have assumed the trans person will lie to the child? Isn't this lie made more for parents than child? If it was just about responsibility for the child the second parent could adopt.

People have talked about genetic truth a lot as well. In the cases of surrogates , the birth mother is on the birth certificate , she has no genetic link at all to the child. Legally, a surrogate can change her mind and keep the child in the uk. Or obviously a child can be produced with donated eggs. So the child could have a birth certificate and grow up with a mother with no genetic link to them. Do we worry that mother could lie here and claim to be genetically linked causing child issues in future? Assuming we don't, does that mean people think trans person is more likely to lie or is it not about genetic correctness just birth correctness of a birth certificate? I'm not saying it doesn't matter, but we need to consider why we feel birth matters.

There is also the fact that no one knows without genetic testing whether the father is true on the birth certificate . And I have seen posts here where a woman in some difficult circumstances is encouraged not to put father on birth certificate even if he's known. So why are we ok with this lie being possible? And again, no one would assume the mother will be barmy enough to tell the child they were conceived through immaculate conception.

The important issues surrounding this for me is whether this will cause issues for the child growing up , what happens when they want a passport or citizenship abroad and only have dad on birth certificate . It could be argued the needs of the trans person here is selfish if it does. But would it not also cause administration issues if mothers legal documentation shows her as male ? So it would still be an issue admin wise either way, so then we have to consider why does one lie matter more than the other?

Also,I have seen someone question the quality of a woman's eggs after she has been taking testosterone for a while. There must be a significant number of people who have lifestyles that damage their eggs. Suggesting they shouldn't be allowed to breed is stepping into eugenics territory which again is pretty distasteful.

Some interesting points have been raised in this debate, but i think (some) people needed to separate their feelings of dislike and therefore assumptions of how a trans person will parent from the actual legal issues of having an incorrect birth certificate. They could be a terrible parent or the best parent ever. We have no idea from the information provided to us.

I didn't mean offense by my comment about intelligent, logic discussion here and it wasn't targeted at any person or topic. I simply meant that the caliber of content here is quite high. I'm often simultaneously impressed and intimidated!

Is it possible we're all on the same page here? Perhaps Terfsup was just agreeing with my statement and essentially including herself as a person who expects logic and reason? Not attacking anyone?

Yeah time to back off Terfsup

Edited to add: That was the point of my post at 20:15:04. I recognised myself in the comment they demand logic and reason and evidence.

If the shoe fits, etc etc.

I will happily put my hand up and say that, yes, when debating an issue I demand logic and reason and evidence.

People speak for themselves here, Shrimpie. If you have a problem with what they say and think it violates talk guidelines it is up to you to report it.

@TerfsUp

I'm sorry but that is goading, and it's mean and I shouldn't have to be the one who says it. Isnt anyone else prepared to call that out?

they demand logic and reason and evidence

Pregnant here too ;) I get it.

Please stick around - we’ve all had our arses handed to us on at least one occasion (this is mumsnet, not the other one...)

FWIW I’m not anti trans at all. I don’t think the majority here are. They’re pro woman.
People with gender dysphoria exist, they need safeguards and society needs to be more accepting of people who don’t conform to many stereotypes.

But it’s this new aggressive push for self ID and the stripping out of women and children’s rights that’s got me - I can’t let it slide, I can’t not stand up against it. It’s got the potential to roll back a hundred years of fightbfor women’s rights. It’s got the potential to undo the safeguarding rules that were all brought in in the response to the real suffering abuse and death of children. This stuff is really important.

@Shrimpi
I've been there. I know how you feel. And I have to say that the feminist chat here on MN is a wonderful but TOUGH crowd. I love these intelligent women and have learned so much, but they demand logic and reason and evidence.

Believe it or not, I think a female fetus starts with something like 6 million eggs! I think the cells just die and get scavenged/recycled like other cells with limited lifespans.

@OrchidInTheSun
I bookmarked the link, and as soon as I can get my little one down for a nap, plan on reading it. Looks VERY interesting and is maybe some of the best information we might have on this topic? (I know they were given mega-doses of androgens. I'm curious as to how the dosing compares to that used for transmen.)

Not to derail the thread, but I'm equally sorry and fascinated (from a medical standpoint) by your status as a DES baby! The other day, my husband showed me this study linking at neurocognitive changes in third generation DES children: www.reuters.com/article/us-health-adhd-des/banned-pregnancy-drug-tied-to-adhd-generations-later-idUSKCN1IN2OW

Endocrine disruptors are so scary!

@GeorgeFayne

I'm post nights and I'm pregnant. I think Im being a bit of a sensitive drama queen atm. I just want to apologise to everyone for digging my heels in over the technicalities of a stupid hypothetical that doesn't even matter anyway.

@Shrimpi
I don't think you are a liar! It was more of a vocabulary thing, (referring to virlized female genitalia as a penis or scrotum), but I agree that in cases of extreme CAH, that may be appropriate. May be that we're just splitting hair on semantics here.

I think the thing for me is that I'm tired of "intersex" individuals being discussed as though they somehow constitute a majority (or sizeable minority) of individuals with gender discongruence. Severe ambiguous genitalia is still quite rare, and fortunately, we're not stuck in the 1950's where a doctor arbitrarily assigned a gender. Between chromosomal studies and imaging, as well as medical and surgical therapy, we now have much better tools to give parents and clinicians to make those tough choices of how to raise these children. Doesn't mean it's always perfect, but it's SO much better!

Please stick around! We value your opinion!

smiley - I absolutely agree that what we need to work on is reducing the polarisation of gender roles and identities. I grew up in the 1970s and 80s and never had to assert agressive “femininity” in the way girls do today. But, back then, l’Oreal and its bedfellows hadn’t brainwashed us.

I agree, this person is a female! It is a fact, she gave birth so therefore she is a female.
I personally don't think you should be able to change your sex full stop. You are what you are and no amount of operations etc can change that. Maybe what we should be working on is that sex/gender not defining who we are as people.
In other arguments.... I wonder, as she now wants to be this child's father, will she forgo her maternity leave, rights as a mother and all the other things that go with being a mother?? Because I bet that would be a whole new argument if her employer said well now your a father and not a mother you are only entitled to 2 weeks paternity...