DM -Italy erases names of gay mothers from birth certs

These points are also valid. Maybe two documents then, one with full details, the other short form for sending out. There’s not really a need for anyone other than me to know who my parents are anyway.

Is there an argument for there being a birth certificate showing both biological parents (if possible) and then another certificate- parental order or adoption type certificate showing who will have parental responsibility for bringing the child up.

Surely genetically it's useful to know your biological parents - you could end up marrying a sibling or close relative otherwise? Also as understanding of inherited conditions grows it may be useful to know your family history.

I think a two certificate system could work really well. One with all info on it. One for use in everyday life (school enrollment etc) with just the legal parents and date and place of birth on it - perhaps linked with a number to help prevent identity theft.

I feel something like this might be appropriate, given that medical advances and rights changes have modified what used to be a relatively uncomplicated situation.

I think there needs to be more clarity on the function of a birth certificate and what can usefully be recorded there. Genetic information about the child is important, but so are those who will raise the child, and sometimes even gave birth to him or her. It would be better to avoid birth certificates becoming a legal battleground over who has the right to be on there and one way to avoid that would be to move from having two parents recorded to having more details reflecting various different aspects of parenting.

I'm not sure which country you are talking about but you can't 'just record any father' in England. You'd be committing perjury by lying at the registration appointment.

I would be in agreement with this, if Italy allowed same sex adoption. That, as PP have said, is where the campaigning should be, not campaigning to legalise birth certificates with two mothers but to give full parental rights and responsibilities to the actual parents raising the child, whatever sex they are.

I think posters advocating for birth certificates with technical info eg sperm donor x, egg donor y, birth mother this legal parents that aren't thinking about the child having to use that birth certificate in life. It's not just a legal record no one sees, you need it for starting school, getting a driving license etc. Would you want to have to share that kind of info about the circumstances of your conception with the school office or whoever?

I confess to having skin in this game - my adopted DC have a short form birth certificate in their adopted name, to use so they don't have to disclose they are adopted when using a BC as ID, and the long form adoption certificate which replaces the long form BC. If Italy did this, to give confidentiality to the child and family where biological accuracy isn't important, then I agree the long form BC should reflect biological reality.

The legal ramifications of not having lesbian parents on BCs is a lot more complex and the issues with stigma in daily life when women or men are not represented on their child’s BC are much more intense and different from each other than some posters seem to be giving credit for.

Sperm donors (legal ones not randoms off the internet) have never been represented on BCs whether to straight or gay or married or single people so that’s a different question.

There has been loads of discussion around BCs on the Freddy McConnell court challenge to BCs threads, if people are interested.

Bottom line though most relevant to the thread title is that there is no reason not to have two women on the birth certificate when they are bringing up a child together.

That is unless you think two lesbians should not be bringing up their kids together, as apparently the Italian PM does? This issue is about lesbophobia, which has nothing whatsoever to do with identity politics. Nor surrogacy which I think is awful.

Also, if you are advocating for kids to have to have their genetic parents shown on their BCs when donor conception is used, then you are extremely naive. That would be massively invading their and their parents’ personal and medical privacy, not to mention making a proportion of women and children at risk of domestic violence and homelessness if non-paternity (which can obviously apply to consensual and non consensual sex) is shown. That’s not a win for women and children or safeguarding.

The child's right to basic information about themselves should be at the centre of this. I like the idea of an extended birth certificate that lists the legal parents, birth parents, egg donor and sperm donor. It could be made available to the child at age 18 and a BC listing the legal parents issued in the meantime. The solution in Italy would be to legalise lesbian adoption if it is illegal.

There is only one mother listed on the birth certificate, the woman who has not given birth is listed as a parent regardless of whether her egg was used. If you use a donated egg you are the mother on the birth certificate, if a heterosexual couple use a sperm donor then the husband/partner is still registered as the father. You can put any man down as the father regardless of genetics or you can leave the father blank even if you know who the father is, so there are many cases where the birth certificate is not representative of genetics, not sure why this only seems to be an issue to people when it involves gay people.

I used an egg donor and my husbands sperm. I grew and birthed my babies. I am listed as the mother on the birth certificate. Should I not be?

They should just put both categories - legal parents and biological parents on the birth certificate and leave blank if unknown. People should have a right to know where we came from and not be misled about family history for medical purposes if nothing else.

Don’t adopted children have a birth certificate with adopted parents names? Is is not about parental responsibility rather than biology? This is what I thought, I could be wrong.

Right? I mean, this is how we ended up with the GRA when we should have got gay marriage

but a birth cert is a reflection of biological parenting. Even if you're adopted you get another birth cert.

Birth certs should be accurate to start with. Relationships don't hinge on a birth cert though.

It's a 'birth' certificate showing the details
someone's birth and not a document showing who has parental responsibility. These are different things. Until relatively recently in this country an unmarried father had to get a parental responsibility order. My partner had to do this for our DC. The question is, whether they have such a thing in Italy. Without it, gay parents are being denied their rights and cannot fully participate in raising their children.

That would seem to be the obvious solution, as the judge in the Freddie McConnell case here in the UK made clear the purpose of a birth certificate is to record the child’s birth accurately, a mother is not the father in Freddie’s case.

A pp said that gay parents are not allowed to adopt in Italy, which if true is probably what leads gay parents to take the matter into their own hands. Presumably the registrar ( or equivalent) was aware of the law and chose to ignore it to complete the registration. Was this done deliberately to challenge the law ? I wonder if and how far they will take it on appeal - haven’t read the DM link.

Then this is where change needs to take place, and campaign efforts should be directed, not creating birth registration documents that are false.

Men and women are not interchangeable for sexual and reproductive purposes. Pretending they are has given massive fuel to the trans madness.

I think applying critical thinking is exactly what the OP has done.

You are being reactionary to something that on the face of it appears to be very cruel and unfair and homophobic.

But actually, a child is not biologically created by two women and it is a legal falsehood to suggest otherwise.

It is absolutely correct however that the birth mother is named on the birth certificate and an additional adoption certificate registered at the same time and conferring the same rights as the biological mother, (or father would have for the child in a heterosexual relationship) is provided to the other woman in the partnership.

I would be out on the streets campaigning if lesbian women were being prevented from adopting and having parental rights in these scenarios, but I think allowing legal falsehoods when they wouldn't be allowed in other scenarios, although the kind and fluffy thing to do in theory, is a very slippery slope.

I don't understand what the point of any birth certificate is if it doesn't list the owner of the egg and sperm that created that child.

If it can just be anyone not biologically related then it ceases to be a document that is actually certifying anything. And will be worthless for the descendents of the child trying to trace back their history.

Still, it will give those companies that do dna searches a bit more money in the future so that's great.

I know a couple one f to m and one f who used a sperm donor - both parents are on the birth certificate - which makes a legal document a lie surely?
I would’ve thought the birth certificate would be true and an adoption certificates issued for the father.

This is UK

There shouldn’t be two women listed as mothers, or two men listed as fathers, no matter the context.

It’s a document reflecting reality, not adults’ feelings ffs.