Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Lesbian couple fight for child born in Canada

100 replies

GleefulGlitch · 05/07/2019 11:49

Story is in the Daily Mail if anyone wants to read it.

The jist is a british women living in Canada had a 9 year relationship with a Canadian women resulting in their marriage.

They used a sperm donor and the British women carried and birthed a child. Both women were on the BC.

The Canadian women wanted to take a job in the UAE however due to their laws as a lesbian she would be refused so she asked Bio mum to remove her name from the childs BC . This was done via the courts 1 year after the childs birth.

Canadian women went on to work in the UAE but later gave the job up and asked bio mum to put her name back on the BC. Bio mum refused there relationship had already ended.
Various things went through court which prevented Bio mum bringing the child to England or even applying for the childs Canadian passport.

Time passed and bio mum and the childs bio dad got together and had another child a boy abd fled the country.

Bio mum was arrested in Jersery and according to the article will be sent back to Canada with the child.

None bio mum wants custody/visitation.

In my opinion this should be denied.
The Canadian women as no bioligical ties to the child and chose to have her name removed from the BC therefore relinquishing parental responsibility so she could apply for a job.
The child is now 4 years old and could be taken away from her mother and brother and given to a women who has had no contact with her for 3 years and is no biological relation.

I am interested in hearing other peoples thought. Thanks.

OP posts:
GleefulGlitch · 05/07/2019 21:36

Well obviously not, there are hundreds of reasons someone has non-bio parents which don't negate them from being parents

Really hundreds or reasons?
Name 20.

OP posts:
KennDodd · 05/07/2019 21:48

A poster up thread said the bio mum and dad were no longer together?

GleefulGlitch · 05/07/2019 21:56

A poster up thread said the bio mum and dad were no longer together?

Sorry must have missed that.
The little girl probably knows who he is and had a relationship with him considering she gas a brother?

OP posts:
SarahAndQuack · 05/07/2019 22:18

20 reasons someone has non-bio parents, which don't stop them being parents.

  1. The bio mother does not know who the bio father is; she is married but was cheating. The child is legally her husband's and is raised as theirs.
  2. The bio mother does not know who the biological father is; she marries someone during her pregnancy and the child is legally theirs.
  3. The bio mother knows who the biological father is; it is not the person to whom she is married, but the child is legally theirs and is raised as such.
  4. The bio mother knows who the biological father is; during her pregnancy she marries someone else. The child is legally his and is raised as such.
  5. The mother is raped by someone other than her husband. The child is legally hers and her husband's; it is raised as theirs.
  6. The child is legally adopted by their bio mum's new husband.
  7. The child is legally adopted by their bio dad's new wife.
  8. The child is legally adopted by a male/female couple.

[All of these are circumstances with long history in law; I imagine there are other permutations.]

  1. The child is born to a single mother using donor sperm; her female partner then adopts the child.

  2. The child is born to a same-sex female couple using donor sperm in a registered clinic; the child is legally theirs.

  3. The child is adopted by a male same-sex couple.

  4. The child is adopted by a female same-sex couple.

  5. The child is conceived using donor sperm by the bio mum and her husband; the child is theirs.

  6. The child is conceived using a donor egg by the gestational mother and her husband; the child is theirs.

  7. The child is conceived using a gestational surrogate carrying the embryo from a male/female couple; the child is raised as that of the couple.

  8. The child is conceived using a gestational surrogate carrying an embryo from donor sperm and the bio mum's egg; the baby is raised as hers and her female partner's

  9. The child is conceived using a donated embryo from strangers and gestated by the intended mother.

  10. The child is conceived using a donated embryo and gestated by a surrogate, then adopted.

  11. The child is conceived using sperm and an egg from the intended parents and a gestational surrogate; the surrogate chooses to keep the child.

  12. The child is conceived using sperm from one of the intended parents and the egg of a gestational surrogate; she chooses to keep the child and it is legally her husband's.

I would think there are plenty of others, surely?

GlitchStitch · 05/07/2019 22:21

The scenario in number 18 isn't legal in the UK.

GlitchStitch · 05/07/2019 22:23

Sorry posted too soon, didn't mean to sound so abrupt! I've heard of that kind of situation in the US though, a donated embryo used via a surrogate.

SarahAndQuack · 05/07/2019 22:26

Interesting to know - but then, this case is not purely about the UK, which is surely what complicates it. An awful lot of fertility treatment is quite deliberately located in the grey areas between countries.

However, if you prefer:

  1. The child is conceived by donor sperm, an egg from the intended mother, and carried by a gestational surrogate, who chooses to keep it; it is legally her husband's and raised as such.
ragged · 05/07/2019 22:29

They called the poor child Kaydance. There is a lot wrong here. #joke

Does UAE demand to see the BCs of all children, why doesn't a mere passport suffice to get child in and out of UAE? How could Biomum live in UAE without having her own job there? So confused.

TitianaTitsling · 05/07/2019 22:29

Yes but you didn't take your name off the Bc and fuck off for a job did you. This. How can she on one hand say a job was more important than being known as the child's mother, and remove her name from the birth cert, then be all over the media saying how she is a massive victim?!

GleefulGlitch · 05/07/2019 22:33

Very impressive Sarah thank you.
So you named 20 as I requested but you stated hundreds of reasons. Can you name 20 more?

OP posts:
GlitchStitch · 05/07/2019 22:40

The authorities have stated the little girl is happy, healthy and appears well cared for but she and her brother have been placed in foster care. It sounds like she is going to be sent back to Canada to live with the other mother and the bio mum is facing prison. I hope the little boy's Dad is able to care for him. Separating siblings, removing children from their main carer and losing their grandparents, none of it sounds in the best interests of the children which I thought was supposed to be the standard.

SarahAndQuack · 05/07/2019 22:48

I think you are getting confused. I never stated hundreds of reasons.

SarahAndQuack · 05/07/2019 22:49

Grin @ragged. Yep, pretty much sums it up.

SarahAndQuack · 05/07/2019 22:51

Oh, glitterstitch, I cross posted with that and now feel bad for joking. That's awful. And yes, sounds very far from what the courts should be doing! I suppose it's possible there's no one else (including the bio dad) who can or will look after them, but that's heartbreaking if so.

GlitchStitch · 05/07/2019 22:56

Yes it's all a mess really. I just think they must be so confused to suddenly be in foster care, I have a 4 year old daughter who is surgically attached to me and she would be traumatised in this situation. I feel bad for the other mother too, but I still think the BC thing is odd. She actually had to petition the court to be removed from it, and the bio mum was granted full custody in 2015. Maybe there is more to all this that isn't being reported? All very sad though.

SarahAndQuack · 05/07/2019 22:58

They don't, in all honesty, sound exactly stable or conscientious, do they?

It could be there's a lot more to it and we don't know. But it could also be that they're simply lousy parents. As a significant minority of parents are, gay or straight.

GleefulGlitch · 05/07/2019 22:59

I think you are getting confused. I never stated hundreds of reasons.

Sorry you didnt another poster did. I was confused because you chose to answer my request to them for some reason Confused

Fab work on the 20 reasons though!

Lesbian couple fight for child born in Canada
OP posts:
SarahAndQuack · 05/07/2019 23:05

Thanks for the apology (again).

GleefulGlitch · 05/07/2019 23:10

No problem.

It can get a little confusing on threads sometimes...teach me to skim read!!

OP posts:
Ihuntmonsters · 05/07/2019 23:18

Same story but from the perspective of the Canadian second mother: www.sookenewsmirror.com/news/update-on-alleged-parental-abduction-of-saanich-toddler-expected-thursday/

It looks like the abducting mother is being held in custody prior to extradition back to Canada. The biological father was a sperm donor and never had contact with the child, the father of the second baby is no longer in the picture (and it's not clear how long he traveled with the abducting mother and children before he left the family so not clear whether the child would have seen him as a parent) and I assume that the grandparents are considered to be complicit in the abduction so thought to be a flight risk. I can see why foster care was thought the best option at least for the time being.

ShatFic · 05/07/2019 23:46

I read the article to mean that they were going to the UAE together, not that he Canadian woman was abandoning her child to go there alone. Even if she did go alone, lots of parents work abroad. That doesn't make them any less of a parent.

The Canadian mother doesn't appear to have done anything wrong. The British mother breached a court order and took her daughter away from her other parent without a valid reason (afaik).

SucculentCandle · 11/07/2019 18:43

@GleefulGlitch
As someone who knows all the adults in this case, and has done for years before the child was even born, I’d like to make/clarify a few points.
The names of all have since been released so I will use them.

To start with Tasha did NOT remove her name from the BC and “fuck off for a job”. Lauren and Tasha were living in the UAE. They both returned to Canada which is where they got married and had the child. The plan was to return to the UAE as a FAMILY.

The two women were planning to move back to the Middle East (that’s where I met them) as a family. As mentioned, this would not be permissible with two women on the birth certificate so it was agreed that Tasha, the non-bio Mum would have her name removed from the BC so they could enter the ME but they would still move as a family and continue to co-parent. Tasha later said she believed this was actually pre-planning on Lauren’s part knowing that she was going to leave Tasha and Canada.

Tasha – whose name was removed is Canadian, not English.

Tasha has never given up trying to find the child. She reported her missing straight away. She made appeals and has appeared on TV hoping someone would come forward with information.

For example did non bio parent continue to financially support the child while in the UAE and after the relationship ended but before the mum fled?
Lauren and the child fled from Canada, leaving Tasha in Canada. The split happened in Canada. Lauren and the child have dual British and Canadian citizenship. Lauren was forced to hand the Canadian passports to authorities and not obtain another passport but she defied this and got British passports for herself and the child which she left Canada on.
The relationship was over before Lauren left Canada with the child. It’s hard to have contact with, and pay maintenance to, someone on the run.

Tasha, the non-bio Mum has not left Canada. She was in Canada when they were married, when they split, when Lauren fled and is still there now. They never made it as far as the UAE because they split and Lauren fled before they moved. Tasha believes Lauren may never had intended to take Tasha to the UAE.

I believe the sperm donor was an ex-boyfriend of Lauren’s.

Tasha did not remove her name from the BC on a whim. It’s because they wanted to return to the UAE – which is where I believe they met, and is a place they both loved – and bring the child up there together (at least, that was Tasha’s plan). This would not have been possible with two women on the BC – they would not have been able to get residence visas.

Well part of me thinks she can’t of been that committed to the child if she was going to work abroad. How many hands on parents would voluntarily do that unless there was literally no other option.
They were ALL going to go abroad for work – Lauren, Tasha and the child.

Lauren DID have another child with the “sperm donor” and he fled with Lauren and the two children (I haven’t discussed the boy because he’s not what this case is about). Soon after, Lauren and the donor became engaged (leading me to believe that there was a plan in the works a long time before Lauren fled). The father (not Kaydance – the child at the centre of this case’s father) was tracked down and said he was no longer with Lauren and had no ide where she and the children were.

Does UAE demand to see the BCs of all children, why doesn't a mere passport suffice to get child in and out of UAE? How could Biomum live in UAE without having her own job there? So confused.
A passport is enough for a child to enter the UAE as a visitor. They were planning on living there so would need residence visas which I believe require the BC (It was a long time ago that we had to go through the process with my own kids so I can’ remember).

Both Tasha and Lauren were intending to work in the UAE and get visas through their employers. As the mother named on the BC, the children would be sponsored by their mother via the mother’s employer.

GleefulGlitch · 11/07/2019 21:32

Thank you for your post Candle

As I said in the beginning I based my opinion on the information I had at the time but I am and have been willing to change that opinion.

Despite your testiment of commitment from Tash I am still unsure of what benefit it is to the child to remove her from her families care and introduce her to and force her to spend time with a non biological person who has not been in the childs life for 3 of her 4 years.

OP posts:
SucculentCandle · 11/07/2019 22:46

Gleeful I think this needs such careful handling.

I remember seeing a video of Tasha just after Kaydance was taken and she looked awful. She was devastated and never gave up.

I'm thrilled Tasha will see Kaydance again but.....she is now a stranger to Kaydance and it needs very careful handling and I don't believe taking Kaydance away from those familiar to her and handing her to someone she doesn't remember is the right thing to do.

I do hope both sides of the family are involved in the next steps.

astridfarnsworth · 11/07/2019 22:47

By that logic, if someone kidnaps a child they’re biologically related to and keeps them for x amount of years the authorities might as well let the kidnapper keep the child because it’s a “benefit” to the child.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page