What about the birth mothers?

[WallaceinAnderland]

Thinking about the recent news around the Scottish GRR. Is it right that a person can legally change their sex on their birth certificate? Does the woman who gave birth to that baby not have a say in this? After all, she birthed the child and registered that birth. This is a fact, is it not?

YANBU a birth certificate is an accurate record held by the state which should not be tampered with

YABU a birth certificate belongs to the baby and is nothing to the with the mother or the state

I don't see any need to get into the role of the mother.

But official records like birth certs should absolutely be scientifically accurate.

It beggars belief what's going on now. Like we've leave of our senses.

I belief the original birth certificate should stand with an additional certificate. But no I don’t think a parent should have a say over what an adult decides to.

Absolutely bonkers argument.

This came up in the Freddie McConnell case. Transman, obviously not a man as birthed a child, wanted to be registered as the father on the child's BC. Think the judge decided the birth certificate 'belonged' to the baby. Something about the baby having the right to an accurate record of their birth

@Sucessinthenewyear if you gave birth to a boy, would you be happy that the birth certificate stated that you gave birth to a girl?

I only voted YABU because the birth certificate belongs to the baby. The parents should have no say on birth certificate changes, changes should be based on facts only.

I personally do not think ANY changes should be made to birth certificates except for correction of errors or additions. For example, if a DNA test proves a different man is the father, then that correction can be made. If a birth certificate doesn’t list the father, then he can be added after going through the process. The same with mothers (it’s been known that unwed pregnant girls have given birth to babies at home that their mother then registers as their own child, so their “sister” is actually their real mother).

If a DNA test shows a person who looked physically female is actually XY (like Castor Semaya) then yes the rare intersex person should be able to correct their birth certificate to their actual sex.

I don’t think sex and gender are interchangeable and that as birth certificates record sex, not gender, that transgender people have no need to change their birth certificates.

The Freddie McConnell case was different because only females can give birth so it would be wrong to say a man had birthed a baby.

But I'm talking about women having their documented birth records changed, possibly against their will.

The birth certificate should never be altered. Sex is sex. Male or Female.

If you start allowing people to change birth certificates they become completely meaningless, what else can people change - Their time and place of birth.
I don't want to be working age I'll time travel my birth certificate and Self ID as retired.

Gender is a wishy washy idea.
Woman = adult human female
Man = adult human male.

Wearing a dress or pink leggings does not turn a Man into a Woman.

Apologies yes different from the FM case but the judge made the distinction in that case about the BC belonging to the baby so no, the mothers don't have a say. It's an excellent point you make.

I think the birth certificate should remain untouched unless there was an error as @Onnabugeisha explained. If the adult wants to change their gender, there should be a separate, subsequent certificate issued to show the amendment.

This doesn’t even make sense, you can change your name so it’s not like the information on a birth certificate is sacrosanct and can’t be changed.

A birth certificate is a record of the birth. It will always say that a mother gave birth to a male child or female child.

What that child may decide to do later is irrelevant. Mess around with hormones, have surgery..etc. The birth certificate is a record of fact on the date of birth, and should stand.

What's the point of a birth certificate if you can start altering it to that degree? You could argue should be able to change your time/date/place of birth too by that logic

Can you change your name on your birth certificate though? Is that right.

A mother doesn't own their child

Yes dead poll

Marriage

But that doesn't change the name written on the birth certificate, does it? It changes your legal name yes, but original record still stands

There are circumstances where the original birth certificate can be changed - the most common being after marriage of parents who were not married at the time of birth, or where no father or the "wrong" father was originally listed.

For just a name change, the original certificate is not amended in most cases. This mainly applies to deed poll and marriage.

Adoption is more interesting in that a replacement certificate is issued with the new name and parents listed, and this can then be used for all legal purposes, but importantly the original registration is NOT amended.

Perhaps in the case of trans people, the adoption model should be used.

@Onnabugeisha in Scotland you can have changes made to your BC already for example I was registered on my original BC as Jennifer Smith & now my BC says my name is Jennifer Wooley with a section at the bottom which notes I was formerly known as Jennifer Smith - it's why we don't have to bother with deed polls up here.

OP I'd never really considered this but yes as a human never mind a woman or a mother I'm not sure I'd be happy to have an official record of what is essentially part of my medical history changed with no consultation or approval from me but then I also get that a BC technically belongs to the person named on it so it's a difficult one.

I don’t think sex and gender are interchangeable and that as birth certificates record sex, not gender, that transgender people have no need to change their birth certificates.

Exactly. Why are we conflating them? It makes no sense. You can't change sex, so altering birth sex on a birth cert shouldn't even be a consideration.

I'm not saying a mother owns her child, I am saying is it right to change the factual details of her birthing a baby.

Especially if she would prefer to keep the record as a true fact of what actually happened to her. It is her history as well as the baby's after all. Should the record show that she gave birth to a girl when, in actual fact, she didn't?

Having the same terms for sex and gender makes the whole debate much more emotive for those involved.

Sex is their sex, you can't change DNA. However, chromosomes aren't tested. You can have people born looking female based on their genitals, but their DNA is actually male. It is actually other issues meant their genitalia didn't develop properly and they have undescended testes etc. There is a village where all babies are born looking female, then at puberty their actual sex becomes apparent and they literally grow a penis.

Sex is sex, and medically that is extremely important. So from that point of view I think accurate records need to be held. However, I can certainly understand why having a legal document calling you female when you identify with the male gender could be very upsetting and invalidating for the individual involved because the same terms are used.

Birth certificates should state fact.

You cannot change sex however hard you dress.

I said I thought the original birth certificate should stand and they should be issues with a gender change certificate.

However, I can certainly understand why having a legal document calling you female when you identify with the male gender could be very upsetting and invalidating for the individual involved because the same terms are used.

Im not sure what the point of getting upset about biology is. It's just fact.

If people want to campaign to include gender identity on official documents as well as sex then perhaps that could be an answer.