The Dad who gave Birth 'Seahorse' Documentary

That BBC article

Legal representatives have told me that they are hopeful that if Freddy does not appeal, other transgender parents will continue with their fight for equality

Equality =/= people pretending that your internal life is reality

Good heavens

Ben Hunte's report for the BBC includes a typical bash at people for being transphobic: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49828705

They don't even pretend to be objective any more

Sally Hines: “In my professional opinion social stigmatisation of children of trans parents could be exacerbated if gender markers of parents do not conform with their gendered name, presentation or parenting role”

How would anyone even know what 'gender marker' for their parents is on the child's birth certificate?

And the rest of that is just sexist bollocks (pretty much what you expect from Sally). More proof that the genderists just want to catapult us all back to the 1950s.

So Hines’s testimony was that McConnell would be really sad if the law didn’t go along with their beliefs?

Key word there is "beliefs". They are confusing their beliefs with scientific fact.

The judgement timeline is interesting -
September 2016 - Freddie suspends testosterone to start fertility treatment
January 2017 - Freddie applies for a GRC
April 11th - GRC granted
April 21st - has IUI and conceives

A cynic would say that this had all been planned

Argh.

Female sex organs are necessary for conceiving and giving birth to a child. This person does not have sperm, which comes from a biological male, which is how someone becomes a father, which is the formalisation of the word "Dad".

Sperm = biological father = Dad.
Egg = giving birth to child = biological mother = Mum.

It's not hard is it?

It is scientifically impossible for them to be the biological and therefore legal father.

Perhaps it was just unsummerisable?

So Hines’s testimony was that McConnell would be really sad if the law didn’t go along with their beliefs?

And that this was a good reason to change the meaning of the word mother?

Post modernism: I’ve said it before, but it’s bad for your brain innit? Just say no kids

Yeah, sounds like most of Sally''s gender twattery didn't make it into the approved judgment.

The judge seems to be a gentleman who can spot bollocks when he sees it.

Wonder who paid for all this?

Us?

Although Sally Hines appears to be referred to quite a bit in the rest of the judgement

I don't think so. Only 4 mentions, 3 of which just mention her as an expert witness and one paragraph (219) which I have quoted part of above.

I see Sally Hines was an expert witness for McConnell

The professor of bantz and feels? Which area of her expertise did she treat the court to I wonder?

62. The court also had the benefit of expert evidence commissioned by each side: a) Professor Sally Hines, Professor of Sociology and Gender Studies at the University of Leeds (Claimant); and b) Peter Dunne, Lecturer in Law at the University of Bristol (Government). In the event, the expert evidence did not feature prominently in submissions. I will not therefore take space here summarising it, but will, so far as it is relevant, refer to it during the later stages of this judgment.

Although Sally Hines appears to be referred to quite a bit in the rest of the judgement

The Government rely upon the expert evidence of Mr Peter Dunne who has concluded that in almost all countries within the Council of Europe a trans-man who gives birth to a child will be registered as the child’s ‘mother’. The small number of European states, and the small number of states in the US or Canada who take a contrary position, fall well short of establishing a European or international consensus.

Slightly off topic, but I wonder if this small number of states are the same ones which are used to illustrate 'International Best Practice' when it comes to gender self ID.

There is a material difference between a person’s gender and their status as a parent. Being a ‘mother’, whilst hitherto always associated with being female, is the status afforded to a person who undergoes the physical and biological process of carrying a pregnancy and giving birth

This could impact on the surrogacy consultation I think?

Based on a review of available research, Professor Sally Hines identified the negative impact on a parent’s psychological ease and parental security, together with the potential for deep psychological distress to the parent by no longer being able to maintain a fully masculine identity.

Freddy did not maintain a 'fully masculine identity' while pregnant. The child having the correct details of their birth recorded on their birth certificate does not stop Freddy from having a 'fully masculine identity' (whatever that is) after the child's birth.

Because they are not a 'news' paper. News is not reported but presented in a way that they like. The won't like this therefore is its not news (and most certainly didn't happen).

They are probably busy sharpening their green crayons and waiting for stonewall to tell them what they think.

I also note the guardian reports on the story, bit doesn't link to the judgment. I wonder why?

Can we now please get back to maternity services being for mothers and mothers to be, not pregnant ‘people’?

Hear, hear.

Also Breast-feeding Mothers.

I see Sally Hines was an expert witness for McConnell

The professor of bantz and feels? Which area of her expertise did she treat the court to I wonder?

Can we now please get back to maternity services being for mothers and mothers to be, not pregnant ‘people’?

adults rights shouldn't trump those of children

This in letters a mile high

How can it be ok to entangle your child in your fantasies?

And let’s be clear, the idea that this female person who conceived, gestated and gave birth to the child is anyone other than their mother is pure fantasy

"In the same period that TT (McConnell) declared to the GR panel that he intended to continue to live as a male until his death, he suspended the programme of testosterone therapy that he had adhered to since 2013 in order to reinvigorate his reproductive system and he actively engaged in arranging for IUI treatment in order to achieve a viable pregnancy by the artificial insemination of one or more of his ova with donor sperm".

The judgment asks the question whether this is fraud, but does not pursue it.

Also:

"It is of note, therefore, that HFEA legislation only permits the HFEA to
license a clinic to provide services to assist ‘women to carry children’". And yet the clinic recorded McConnell's sex as male. McConnell will probably sue the clinic now.

The judge is the same one who lifted the anonymity order previously since McConnell was filming a documentary at the same time.

Seems like McConnell has a habit of claiming one thing while doing the exact opposite.

So McConnell is a claiming to be a man and live as such forever, while simultaneously stopping testosterone and trying to get pregnant.

Equally, McConnell claims to need anonymity, while simultaneously recording a tell-all documentary that identifies them and the child.

I'm glad this person has been found out.

I see Sally Hines was an expert witness for McConnell.

Thank goodness

What the hell the person who wanted to do this was thinking I’ll never know

Well that's a relief.

I was quite surprised by this "Finally, those acting for the child applied under the Family Law Act 1986 for a declaration that McConnell was his father."

Who are these people? Social services or the child's GP?

I'm astounded that anyone would think that telling a child that this person is your father wouldn't cause major trauma when at an older age they discover that they are actually their biological mother. This isn't even a trans issue, look at Kat "you ain't my muvva!" on Eastenders, or every person who discovers the people they were told were their parents aren't. Or adopted kids desperately trying to track down birth parents.

It isn't rocket science that everyone wants to know the truth of where they come from, and adults rights shouldn't trump those of children.

Another one here thinking how ridiculous a situation we're in to be so relieved about this (fucking obvious) decision

Add another one to that!!

Another one here thinking how ridiculous a situation we're in to be so relieved about this (fucking obvious) decision.

Am wondering if this will have wider implications re: the legal definition of woman being based on biological fact?