Lesbian mothers should be on birth certificates

Its not insulting, its bigoted and deeply
seated bigotry at that. Due to some lgbt issues, some think that the pendelum has swung.

The one who gives birth is legally the parent, regardless of DNA. This is a useful thing because in my country (which has basically the same law) this has worked very well as a backstop against illegal surrogacy arrangements. It means the woman who was pregnant and gave birth has some legal rights.

This
I'm not a lesbian parent, am a heterosexual one but even I can see that it discriminates against lesbian parents, it's not equal rights is it if hetero couples don't have to declare donors.

Why would you think posters don't think the sperm donor, rather than the mother's husband, should be recorded?

It's obviously easier to fudge in such a case, and it's very unfortunate that people have been led to think this is ok or told that it should be ok.

I think it's mainly a function of the fact that fertility treatments and how they are handled legally where there are donors has largely developed outside the framework of children's rights. It's very much in the state that adoption was 80 years ago. It's only much more recently that we've looked at adoption laws and procedures rigorously from the position of children's rights rather than what the adoptive parents would prefer. And that includes secrecy about the fact that children are adopted - no matter how much adoptive parents might want that, it's no longer considered acceptable. And there are arguably more reasons that it might have advantages for the child in adoption, where the scenario is almost always a sad accident, as opposed to a situation deliberately created by parents.

I think gamete donors should not be encouraged to think they are not parents to a child because the process was done in a different way. Even if they never have anything to do with said child.

Are you also insulted by adoptive mothers being listed as such?

do not believe that people who use complicated methods to obtain a child should have the same right to simple documentation as those who conceive without the added complexity of donor parentage. It’s complex. The documents should show it. Why shouldn’t it?

Because straight couples can easily hide their use of donors, it puts a discriminatory onus on homosexual couples despite the issue actually affecting far more children born to heterosexual couples.

it’s all or nothing, for everyone.

It may seem insulting to you.

To me, as a mother who actually gave birth, it is incredibly insulting to dismiss the physical sacrifices such as pregnancy vomiting, genital tearing, stress incontinence, post-childbirth womb infection, and pure pain I went through, by suggesting that a lesbian who has never been pregnant should be recorded on a birth certificate as a mother. She is not one.

This kind of lobbying is just another example of the anti-woman movement promoted across the world at the moment. You can recognise it by the way it dismisses women’s experiences and biological realities. Most importantly, it also tells mothers that we are no longer allowed opinions about matters concerning our bodies and that someone else’s feelings are far more important than our own.

It makes it easy to point out the blatant discrimination and homophobia.

If a heterosexual man has the right to use a donor to have a child with his partner without acknowledging the donor, a homosexual woman should have an equal right to do so.

If neither have this right because a child’s right to know their verified genetic parentage supersedes all, then all children must be DNA tested at registration.

I think the point is that the BC should be a biologically/factually accurate statement about who a person is, and children of donors have as much right as naturally conceived children to have that truth and accuracy about who they are - factually, biologically, genetically on their birth certificate.

Until donor assisted conception intervened in the natural process of creating babies and essentially ‘split’ the meaning of mother and the meaning of parent, this was not an issue.

There is a good case for ‘birth certificate’ and ‘parental responsibility certificate’ to be separated into two separate documents, in the case of donor conception, or for the donor’s names to be on an additional section of the birth certificate, which does have any associated parental responsibility.

I do not believe that people who use complicated methods to obtain a child should have the same right to simple documentation as those who conceive without the added complexity of donor parentage. It’s complex. The documents should show it. Why shouldn’t it?

I take your point. I'm just not sure where it gets us.

I’m a lesbian with donor conceived children, I think I’m on the right thread 🙄

it does matter that standards are applied equally within a society, and pointing out that this would be impossible to regulate within heterosexual couple Is an appropriate consideration in the analogous situation in homosexual couples.

@flaffydaffy

And why should an unmarried lesbian parent have to go through a lengthy process to go on the birth certificate when all an unmarried father has to do is turn up to the registration and state he's the father?

I'm sorry I misread the info. When a mother is not married or in a civil partnership, her partner can be seen as the child’s second parent if both women:
• are treated together in the UK by a licensed clinic
• have made a ‘parenthood agreement
To register the birth, they just both need to turn up at the registration.

Do you want the sperm donor's actual name to be on the birth certificate i.e. do away with any anonymity in sperm donation? Or would you want it to say "sperm donor"? If it's the former then that's a much wider issue than just birth certificates. And if it's the latter then what good would that do?

No, because you don't know their name. And no, I (or my son rather) would like his father's donor number recorded.

Although I can guess your views on trans issues and are too coloured in your view, il humour you.

Let's say we (you) want to change the law.
Are you changing it so that the egg giver is the legal parent, not the person who gives birth to a child? ...why?

Outright lie. I cba looking back through but you were stating it as fact earlier in the thread. Youce been proved wrong and are back tracking.

That aside, we dont need to change anything. How arrogant of you.

But you're comparing apples and oranges.

We are talking about the complexities for lesbian couples, shown by the idiotic responses on this thread who argue about things they dont know.

The fact theres more straight couples is irrelevant. That's not what the thread is about.

That's like someone talking about their cat and you saying well what about dogs.

We didnt ask.

This is a thread about lesbians. If you want to fight the cause of straight parents, start a thread.

of course not, I have suggested that the same standards apply to all donor conceived children, even in heterosexual couples, that is all.

I personally don’t think it’s necessary to list a donor with no parental responsibility, but the people that think so should apply the standard equally.

I don’t think you properly read the post you replied to. The point was that gamete donation affects far more children born to straight couples.

Omg.

In going to say ir really simply.

In legal terms, the parent is the one who gives birth.

You can agree or disagree but your posts are bizarre. Its legal fact.

Why are you arguing and discussing am issue you know absolutely nothing about?

I don't think this poster understands what homophobia is. What donormum is saying is the exact opposite of homophobia....

Are you suggesting that hetero couples are the badly done to set when it comes to conception and the law? Surely not
Whataboutery isnt usually popular

Yes, it is funny when so many people on this thread claim to only care about biology, which has been discussed at length, but refuse to address the analogous situation in heterosexual couple, which is completely relevant in a discussion about how a country chooses to record births.

@DonorMum And unless and until certain posters are willing to advocate for listing sperm donors instead of the mothers’ husbands in the case of straight couples, your homophobia slip is showing.

Posters have said over and over again that the biological father's name should be on the birth certificate and the mother's husband should be an adoptive father. So if anything is 'showing' it's your willingness to use the accusation of 'homophobia' as a tactic to win an argument.