Lesbian mothers should be on birth certificates

Do you understand how same sex female conception works?

SapphosRock

i'm sure that you see that many people are sympathetic to the ins and outs of non-heterosexual parenthood, and the different ways in which children can be conceived.

And the consensus seems to be along the lines of a double certification. One recording biological fact, and the other parental responsibility, both produced at the same time.

To my ears, it sounds eminently sensible, and shouldn't be that difficult to implement.

Do you agree with it?

I think people would like to think that because it suits their agenda.

I cant think of many examples where a child would be in turmoil because both or their female parents are on their birth certificate.

Birth certificates should reflect biological reality and record history, not hide it. It’s time for a complete redesign.

there should be a first line for the genetic parents of the child.
then a second line for the legal parents of the child .
and even a third or fourth line of the child’s life ends up being complicated.

for a lesbian couple, only the biological mother should be listed as a genetic parent. The second mother should be able to be listed as a legal parent as long as that legal status is confirmed.

Well, it was either at me or at others designed to point out my comment.

Both cases make mu point.

I wouldn't mind, but it was you who decided earlier upthread that everyone was allowed an opinion without question.

Fwiw I think the current fudge for lesbian couples where the woman who carried the baby appears on the birth certificate as ‘mother’ and the other partner as ‘parent’ works just fine from a parental responsibility point of view, and is in the immediate best interests of the child to have clearly responsible parents from birth

my concerns are

1. trying to apply the same logic to gay couples resulting in a loss of rights for birth mothers

2. the feelings of the children. I suspect a number of lesbian couples may find themselves presented with questions from their children around the entries on their birth certificates

It would also be ruled if an awful crime happened to someone and there was no evidence that he person is not guilty. Wouldnt make it hurt any less

I sometimes wonder it the people who write these posts behave like this in real life, going around telling everyone facts. I'd love to see their friendships and relationships. Or whether they just save it all up to say hurtful things on the internet.

Nor was mine directed to you…

And that is how we have another current thread running where a teenage daughter has told her mother to get an abortion because she doesnt want less money going on her and PPs are agreeing because it's a fact.

can I tell my boss tomorrow then that I'm not doing a task for him because hes a rude obnoxious man?

No?
Oh.

Yes, but that 'emotion'line that gets trundled outbl when people point out people have feelings is irrelevant.
That aside, you dont speak for me.

Absolutely that @Robinbuildsbears. Facts are what matters.

This is just what the high court ruled would be UK law. Any woman who gives birth will be recorded as the mother even if she personally identifies as a man and a father.

Biology and believing in biological reality is not “homophobic”, bullying or “transphobic”.

Sorry, do I need to redirect you to your point that it's a discussion chat forum and nobody's point carries more weight just because you agree?I dont remember directing that comment to you.

And now the “transphobia” claims have started… 🙄

You may have missed it in my posts, but I am also adopted. I had the adoption certificate hanging on my bedroom wall for years because I was so proud of it. I am very close to my dad's side of the family, more even than my mum's side who I'm biologically related to. All these emotional responses are completely and utterly irrelevant to the importance of a factual birth certificate stating biological parentage.

@WildUnchartedWaters who is saying only biological facts matter?

No, I am not part of a same sex parenting partnership. I have not walked in your shoes. You are not a donor conceived child. You have not walked in mine.

Do we disagree that the rights of a child come first when it comes to documenting their birth?

No because only biological facts matter.
Apparently.

So stupidly reductive, @WildUnchartedWaters
Are you this blinkered in all areas of your life, I wonder?

I agree.

As an adopted person I am somewhat offended I have to say by some of these posts.

Transphobic.

Can we stop with this?

No because only biological facts matter.

Apparently.

Your words are again beautiful and thought provoking.

Agree with this.

As you can probably tell from my user name, I make my living doing genealogy. A birth certificate has since 1837 in England and Wales and since 1855 in Scotland stated the biological parents of a child. Mother and Father. If unmarried, mother only in most cases.

I have no problem with two women or two men raising a child together, but they do not both have biological input into that child as a mother and father do. Agree that a good compromise would be to retain the birth certificate as a statement of biological fact (mother/father) and have the option of another "parent certificate" to list the people who are raising the child and have responsibility for him//her.

thank you for the support.

Re. point 2. I don't see the irony. But I think you are presuming only a biological notion of heritage, or you are worried I am thinking of overwriting their biological links from their own stories. Do your children sing songs you taught them, that your parents taught you? Do you have mannerisms that you picked up from family members? Do you have stories about great grandfathers who did something interesting? Do you have places that feel like you belong to them, and they to you, because of family history there? Did you learn skills from a family member that you pass on to your children? Are you interested in the people who came before in the story of your life, what they were like, what they passed on (for better and worse!), what they cared about? Biology is only part of all those stories. My children love their grandparents on my side, they are formative people in their lives, they give them one part of their sense of roots. Their children will have the right to find a record that can show them where those songs might have come from, through my mother, through me, to them. My children know also about their biological makeup. Their children will have a right to know where their genetic traits came from. This is another part of their story. Their roots are far and wide. When you jibe my claim that they deserve to be able to trace their heritage, your thinking seems to be that some of those formative parts of selfhood just don't, or shouldn't count, and are false, or superficial, or less important. The birth certificate says, you were born to these people, when you came into the world you came into their family, that is a very important part of their story.