He fathered a child using his eggs...

"The pronouns and labels needed are not really the concern of the rest of us if we aren't midwives or obstetricians*

I disagree. I individual cases I can support staff using preferred pronouns to the transman, but it's dangerous to say they fathered the child. That has a very specific biological meaning that can impact on the health and wellbeing of the child.
Biological processes shouldn't be obscured by misleading language.
I've worked as a geneticist, I've taken complex family histories and tried to track x-linked conditions through generations (for example).
Who the mother is and who the father is biologically needs to be clear and explicit on all documents and in the minds of family members. It's polite to use preferred pronouns day to day, it's dangerous to apply preferred pronouns to biological processes where sex matters.
Conceiving and birthing a child is a biological process where sex matters.

The pronouns and labels needed are not really the concern of the rest of us if we aren't midwives or obstetricians.

I disagree because the change in language is pushed onto all mothers and pregnant women.

I don't really care if an individual transman insists that all the clinicians in their medical appointments or birthing suite use the terms 'birthing parent' or 'father' rather than mother.

But it doesn't stop there - the current insistence is that all women are addressed with certain terms without their input or consent to appease a tiny minority of people who won't be present in those women's medical appointments or birthing suites.

Blimey that’s a world first

Someone told me that a midwife they work with who is F-M trans is now trying to be a surrogate for gay men.

I'm happy for trans-men to have beanies and nurture them

Nice Freudian typo there. I wish they would stick to beanies if they’re not going to call it by what it is ie having BABIES because they are WOMEN

We've been "interfering with nature" since the first broken bone was set, I guess; it's part of human civilisation. If nature had been been interfered with, I for one wouldn't still be alive!

I think this is more of a language issue which could have been avoided by use of the gender-neutral "parented" instead. Though parenting, like mothering, carries meanings of nurture and care while fathering mostly doesn't, or not so much. A man (can we still say man?) can father a child in one meeting and never be seen or heard from again, can't he (can we still say he?)?

I think an element of the TRA lobby is being deliberately challenging - even provocative - with its use of language, like someone spoiling for a fight.

We need to pick the hills we are willing to die on, and thus isn't one for me. I'm happy for trans-men to have beanies and nurture them and for the NHS to take good care of them, just as they should all pregnant women and mothers. The pronouns and labels needed are not really the concern of the rest of us if we aren't midwives or obstetricians. Let's avoid giving oxygen to the people who seem to us to be attention seeking but harmless. Seahorse parents are always going to be a vanishingly tiny minority and they aren't any threat. I'm much more concerned about the subverting of public bodies like councils, schools and universities that can lead to silencing, cancelling and actual harm to children.

I wondered, given the general invisibility of transmen, if this couple really are the first UK transgender couple to have a baby. Seems unlikely.
Biologically female partners, however they identify their gender, have been having babies together by using donor sperm since forever.

Did they fuck as like. They could only have 'fathered' a child if they produced the sperm. That biology, not transphobia.

www.thesun.co.uk/news/11418758/transgender-parents-hannah-jake-graf-baby/

They used Jake’s eggs and donor sperm and a surrogate carried their baby.

Did Jake use a surrogate?

Excuse me for apparently being thick but only biological females produce eggs. Biological males produce sperm.

Being trans can't change that.

just on a point of grammar - I don't think one would say that someone had "mothered a child" and be meaning that they had created a fetus/baby.

Personally I have no problem with someone creating a child in such an unusual way but I do suspect there will be all sorts of issues to deal with as the child grows up and understands how they are different from others.

Their child has to accept that. the child will feel that being feminine is letter her parent down. Her being to overtly masculine is letting their parent down. Whatever expression they push back down to be obligingly non-binary for their parent's sake.

Is that the person who is also raising their child non-binary ?? I read something on line the other day, glanced at it and thought, what, they're both non-binary? what a coincidence...

FFS!

it is taking the piss! How arrogant to think that their demands should override the basic concepts of human biology. The eggs are produced by the mother - end of. It's been rejected as a legal concept in any case, that recent court case of Freddy McConnell, a transman who applied to be named as the father (after actually carrying the baby!!) - they are messing about with nature.

That is dreadful.