Lesbian mothers should be on birth certificates

It's not homophobic or transphobic for the child to know who is actually the mother or the father. I am using those words in the correct biological manner, if person A who has produced eggs or sperm believes that they have a different identity that makes no difference. Only females can produce an egg and only males produce sperm. And the birth cert needs to show that. No child.so far, has been born without egg and sperm meeting and fusing together, no matter how that is achieved, and unless there as a good reason, such as risk of violence then the father/sperm donor needs to be named,for the benefit of the child.
As others have said, it's not beyond the wit of any sensible person, to find some way of recording the facts of the biology and then the circumstances who actually cares for the child.

Comments about biology and facts aren't ridiculous tho. They're the premise of the argument.

People get pissed off at being called homophobic over issues that might well affect homosexuals, but aren't limited to them.

And the transgender issue has brought it all to the fore. Many people are seeing the push to alter irrefutable biological facts, like saying a person was born female when they were born male.

It's raising the issue of 'biology and facts', like it hasn't done previously.

It needn't be unsympathetic, but you can't blame people for becoming hardened.

This.

If a woman suggested on here explaining that her dad just didnt give a shit , posters would be up in arms. But why? Its fact and biology, no?

Then theres the ones who split from someone and have threads telling them the father has no right to know. Again, biology and fact.

As you've said in your well written post, when it comes to same sex and trans, there are marked differences that those who claim to understand but dont cant see.

Then perhaps we could show compassion to the adults who are involved, instead of ridiculous comments about biology and facts.

@Rudderneck , youl be lucky. Same sex parentage is still so controversial that they are fair game.

There isn’t a universally established right to know your biological parentage, though.

Most of the horror stories about lack of knowledge are from donor conceived children of straight couples.

When a same sex couple (like myself) has children, we know we’ll have to explain the conception from the beginning, and it often becomes part of the child’s story before they can even understand.

The people that lack that are usually children brought into straight relationships, where parentage is more easily hidden.

I debate sensibly with people who debate sensibly with me. As hannahbanana hasnt yet done anything than make silly comments, I react in kind.
You got the same with your 'love'comment.

I am able to discuss things perfectly sensibly with people who know what they're talking about.

This leads me back to my point about people thinking they can say and behave however they like and earn respect. No.

I know this is clearly close to the nerve for you, but you are behaving in a way that makes sensible discussion impossible

is that intentional?

Yes, of course. And discussing it with children should always be compassionate.

I agree with this.

Youce still not answered my question from earlier, my little banana friend. One silly contribution at a time please.

In years gone by, adopted children weren't told they were adopted. That changed in recognition that children have a right to know who their bio parents are. The HFEA changed legislation for DC children for the same reason.

There is nothing inhumane in acknowledging that children should have rights.

In the same way that nobody is denying that the child has a donor but it could be a compassionate discussion you mean?

Would you tell your child.they were fat? No. But biological facts matter right?

I'm genuinely not being disingenuous

Well if you’re not being disingenuous, you’re being daft.
Being fat is a physical matter, not a biological one.

I think a lot of people would tell their child they were fat.

In the interests of the child. To help them lose weight.

I don't think it's very healthy to deny it. Is that what you mean?

As far as I can tell, the only person under UK law who has total say over whether or not they appear on a child's birth certificate is an unmarried biological father who can either turn up and be registered, or not bother. That seems wrong somehow. I agree that perhaps the process needs an overhaul overall, but that should start with what is the purpose of birth certificates and what information is required for those purposes, rather than the needs of individuals.

I can be. When I'm not being weirdly aggressive.

Nah I genuinely apologise if I'm come across as aggressive. I do have skin I'm the game when it comes to same sex couples.

Fwiw I'm disgusted at what you've had to hear , and I admire your stance on this. Its thought provoking.

I understand that, but as you've cherry picked a quote i made in a side conversation with a poster who thought a legal patent was a 'surrogate ', it's pointless trying to give it as a contribution to the wider debate. It wasnt. Love.

The thing is, I dont really have a position.
I just really object to some of the posts in relation to same sex couples and the fact homophobia has become completely acceptable in plain sight. At som point recently we decided that facts and biology were more important than peoples feelings and as I pointed out earlier, and I really wasnt being disingenuous we dont extend this to all aspects of our life.

Would you tell your child.they were fat? No. But biological facts matter right?

I'm genuinely not being disingenuous, and I feel like this across a lot of topics. We are losing sight of humanity in the name of being right and I dont like it.

That’s not all that’s at play though is it? We’re discussing the child’s right to understand their biological heritage

Since I'm 'weirdly aggressive' by posters who have decided they are the CEO of all things donor, from your point of view could you tell me your view on the legal rights? I'd be interested to hear it from other people with experience.

@WildUnchartedWaters I see why you have come to your position. I still think you're wrong. Yes, it may be hurtful to parents, but what matters is what's in the best interests of the child, not the parents' feelings. This applies in all aspects of parenting, and I don't see why a child's birth certificate is any different.

LOL that was an unfortunate cross post @WildUnchartedWaters. Thank you, that's kind 

This is something I've thought about and discussed at length with other parents of DC children, as well as the children. I am very aware of how fraught the conversations can get, not least because you are discussing other parent's parenting decisions and that is always liable to get personal. I'm not immune to that at all and I have been really hurt by people thinking that I should never have had my son, that every child deserves a father etc. I'm sure @SapphosRock and @mumarooni have also had to face down that kind of criticism.

But we do need to have the conversations. And it's no longer good enough to say that it might be hurtful to parents to have them. We have made decisions to have children in unconventional ways and we owe it to them to listen to their concerns and voices, no matter how uncomfortable those conversations may be for us.

🧐

hmm

A donor.
Could you explain to me where this is relevant to which woman is the legal parent?