Transman gives birth - wants to be father/parent

complex rules which require people who give birth to be listed as mothers on birth certificates

Complex rules?? if you give birth, you are a mother!! FFS.

He argues that as he was legally recognised as male at the time of the birth, it is incorrect to describe him as a mother.

That's bonkers. Legally recognised as male? he can't have a GRC as male if he's pregnant can he??

Why is he banging on about this? Surely he should be happy he has the child he wanted. He should be getting on with it and parenting. And it's his CHILD's birth cert he wants to change - not his own. Madness.

Hey hey hey. Let’s leave being shitty about cosplay out of this please

This will be a strategic case. I'm convinced it's deliberate.

There is an enormous push to blur the differences between the sexes. And it's coming from the men, not the women.

The number of women identifying as men who get pregnant must be tiny. I hope no judge deems it worthy of a law change.

What I really wish is that we had a team of lawyers who could sniff out the agendas and present an in-depth counter argument, which detailed all the possible future implications.

Because I'm sure they are manifold.

I was thinking back to threads on here a year or so ago. Most people talking about toilets, prisons, and sport.

And also the erasure of women. But the mechanisms by which this is being done are so sneaky and creative, I don't think most people envisaged all these different ways.

I guess pregnancy is female in the way erections are male?

So...not at all, according to the owners of ladypeen and manwombs?

Being a man is all in your head I guess. So if you are a pregnant man, then pregnancy is a male thing for your body to do.

It’s bollocks of course. But I think that is the rationale.

The birth certificate is for the child not the parent. WRT surrogacy, I hope it remains the case that the birth mother is on the birth cert. I don't like the idea of wombs for hire and can envisage some coercion there in the future. I honestly can't understand how someone who claims to be a trans man can happily conceive, gestate and birth a child without dsyphoria kicking in. It's about the most female thing you can do! And no matter what the law considers that person as now, male or female, that person was the baby's mother, and the child has a right to have the correct information on his/her birth certificate.

I haven’t seen that Fekko but I did spot this (reposted from the previous thread):

a male-born person without a GRA (but while identifying as a woman) argued unsuccessfully that it breached their human rights not to be able to put themselves down as ‘parent’ or ‘father/parent’ on their (naturally conceived) kids’ birth certificates.

www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2015/990.html

So from a quick read through the judgement, if this father failed to convince that human rights were breached by not being able to be listed as something other than ‘father’, perhaps it’s not looking very hopeful for this more recent case wanting to not be listed as mother.

I just don’t know if they will be able to successfully argue that social attitudes has changed so this kind of legal validation via other people (such as their child) must be provided.

I'm wondering if there have been any instance if bio males demanding to be 'mother' on the birth cert?

Surrogacy erases women/mothers. In the US the intended parents get a court order naming them both on the birth certificate before the baby is born. It therefore gives them legal rights to claim the baby as theirs and stop the mother reneging on the contract.

So in the case of 2 men commissioning a surrogate there is never any legal record of that child’s mother (egg donor) or gestational host. Parents who use surrogacy are desperate to loosen the bonds between mother and child hence they introduce this degree of separation.

It's important, when explaining your relationship to your child, you choose the moment wisely.

This is not the way to do it:

If you are a father you get to choose whether to be there for the birth, mother permitting. Mothers don't.

^^ Nailed it!

It’s important that the child can identify it’s correct family history, putting the birth mother down as the father complicates things should the child develop any genetic diseases etc.

Quite. There are conditions you can inherit from the maternal side which aren't going to go away just because someone calls themself your father.

If you are a father you get to choose whether to be there for the birth, mother permitting. Mothers don't.

Mothers aren't looking on feeling useless, pacing up and down in the corridor, having a crafty fag outside, or miles away entirely oblivious of the fact they have just become a parent with someone they barely knew.

If you give birth, you go on the birth certificate as the mother. It's only in the case of surrogacy when that should be changed

In the UK the surrogate mother goes on the birth certificate.

Re that couple in what possible way are either of them men?

By which I mean, those seem like two very sweet, nice young people. What happened to get them to the point they're at now? Why is everyone around them colluding in it?

A touch of the Violet Elizabeth Botts?

By which I mean, those seem like two very sweet, nice young people. What happened to get them to the point they're at now? Why is everyone around them colluding in it?

It’s important that the child can identify it’s correct family history, putting the birth mother down as the father complicates things should the child develop any genetic diseases etc. Besides, doesn’t the child have the right to know?

Also, can anyone clarify re: these countries that require sterilisation as part of the process to change gender? In the case of a man, if he has surgery, that must render him sterile, what with having all the relevant parts removed. So does that mean only those who have surgery can legally change? A bit different for female to male as presumably they wouldn't immediately have surgery, however a few years of testosterone does the trick I believe, rendering the ovaries useless.

That BBC doc is the most eye-rolly thing I've ever seen.

I'm so glad I no longer work as a midwife. It would take about five minutes for me to be sacked and sent to the gulag for re-education should I ever be presented with a pregnant trans-man.
I find the concept very sad, an insult to all pregnant women, mothers and women who can't get pregnant, an insult to biology and language. And I would be very concerned for the future wellbeing of the baby.

The birth certificate is the property of the child, not the parent.

This is key. Why should the parent have the right to muck about with their child's birth certificate?

Japan has taken measures to prevent this kind of situation. Not saying it is the right measure, but does consider any current and potential future children in someone’s decision to trans.

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/japan-transgender-people-sterilise-before-transition-gender-change-lgbt-rights-a8086341.html

Why is it so important? You can pretend you're a man in every other way. It's just pure narcissism. Poor kid. No one doesn't have a mother. Children who are adopted for instance have the right at 18 to find out about their biological parents and obviously what role they played. The state needs to stop indulging this fucking toxic nonsense.

Could have been worse. Imagine if Blockbusters was still around. Getting a Blockbusters card was way harder than a passport or a birth certificate.

It really was

If you give birth, you go on the birth certificate as the mother. It's only in the case of surrogacy when that should be changed.
A mother can never be a father, it's absurd. It should be about the child, not the parent. Children have the right to know who their mother is.

Why wasn't the birth certificate issued after she had the baby?