Lesbian couple sign joint birth certificate

[onebatmother]

Proud moment for anyone interested in these kind of milestones.

Message Deleted by Mumsnet

To ALL parents i am delighted that we all have equal parental rights!!

Lenin....I will waiting for my room101 parent class!!

lol daftpunk

Birth certificate doesn't necessarily = biological parents. If a married couple conceive using donated eggs or sperm, it's the couple whose names are on the birth cert, not the donor.

The HFEA has the record of the biological parents, the birth cert is a social construct.

If Birth certificate doesn't necessarily = biological parents. then what does. where is the record of who the biological parents are ?
Maybe i am being simplistic, but I think the birth record SHOULD be the biological parents.
No that doesn't work does it. i don't know. i can't see how to resolve this.

birth certificate isn't always a complete record of biological parents anyway, as if the father legs it and refuses to be on the certificate the information isn't put on it. So although I can see the argument for biological parents both being on it, in practice it is a social construct, as GoldenGreen says in terms of parents who are willing to accept some degree of responsiblity.

The birth certificate should only list biological parents IMO.

What is the point of recording non biological 'parents' on a birth certificate? Adoption is designed for these situations where on a non biological 'parent' wishes to take on responsibility for a child. IMO the birth certificate should just be facts, the 2 people who created the child, if the Father is unknown that should be blank. I cannot see the logic in adding people to the BC that are not the biological parents.

I feel exactly the same about hetro couples, you shouldn't be allowed to put names on the BC if they are not the biological parent. Just because you are in a relationship with someone at the time of birth does not make that person the Father. Again, adoption can happen later, the BC should remain the biological Mother and Father only.

Perhaps agreement to go on the birth cert should also include a parental responsibility contract?

alos, if you ar maried when your DCs are born, the person you are marie to is assumed to be the father...the assumpion of a lesbian partner as a parent when married to the mother is just the same thing.

aren't 10% of fathers names on birth certificates wrong anyway? and, presumably, a tiny minority of the mothers names too?

I don't see why anyone ould want a child, with, perhaps, a less clear parentage to have to go through more hoops to get a birh certificate - my Mum gets upset every time she has to produce hers (she was named by court order and has no birth certificate, only an adoption certificate).Don't people realise how upsetting this stuff can get?

It would have been better if just her adoptive Mum & Aunt's names were on her BC.

I think the real solution between the conundrum that the birth certificate is a factual statement regarding genetic lineage vs a statement about who indend to be parents to the child might be to split it onto two seperate documents, one which is primarily for medical purposes logging the genetic parents of the child, which hold those named to no parental responsibility, and a second which lists those who are accepting parental responsibility.

Thinking about it it might even be three certificates, with the third being a literal 'birth certificate' simply affirming that the baby was given birth to by a certain woman at a certain place and time etc..

I'm v pleased the system has been broadened to accommodate same sex parents. Hooray!

However, what all this shows is that the old notion of birth certificate is no longer fit for purpose in a world where a child may be born of a mother who had IVF from a donor egg, or with her infertile DH who used a sperm donor, or like the children of gay Dads in the USA may have tow fathers, one of whom donated sperm to a surrogate mother, other forms of surrogacy...

There needs to be something which records the parents who are endowed with the permanent and ongong responsibilities of parenthood, and also has scope to record any other parties in the process who wish to or agree to be recorded! e.g the bio father or the surrogate mother.

one which is primarily for medical purposes

as, even if your parents are your biological parents they are under no obligation to tell you anything at all about thei medical history, what is the point of this?

at the turn of the nineteenth century, 1/3 fathers were not the one stated in h records...i don't think falliability o the record as a genetic record is anything new.

As Leningrad points out - the purposes you use a BC for don't really need that one thing to be accurate, it just needs to be a record that a person of your name was born in X place care of A and B...i think the only thing i have ever used mine for was passport/driving license.

personally i think the birth certificate should state the biological parents, inc egg and sperm donor even if that is just a number related to a confidential database and also the parents. so on my form it would have:

Biological mother (name or number)
Biological Father (name or number)
Parent 1 -
Parent 2 -

All inclusive and covers everything.

Biological mother (name or number)
Biological Father (name or number)
Parent 1 -
Parent 2 -

what is the point of this? for people conceived by normal means, you only ever have the mothers word for it anyway....

and th medical record thing is nonesense for th reason stated below: we have the right to privacy of our medical history, and hat includes from our children.

I am tracing my family tree and birth certs are a great source of family heritage. They are not necessarily reliable records of biological connection though. A study by Prof Mark Bellis suggested that 1 in 25 fathers might unknowingly be bringing up babies not their own. They are on the birth cert. Just though I'd chuck that in the mix.

So children conceived by donor eggs or sperm should have a number under biological mother/father, and have their parents listed under 'parent one or two'? Crap and nonsense. Try to imagine you conceive a child after IVF and a donor egg. You go to register the birth and aren't allowed to put your name under 'mother' but have to stick a number in, and put your name further down?

This is a storm in a teacup for those who think it's wrong, but a massive deal for same sex couples. Birth certs confer PR, which for gay couples can be a massive issue if the bio parent dies. For those who think only bio parents should be named - why? non-bio fathers are named all the time, my friend is going to add her DP's name to her son's BC, his bio F isn't interested, DP is DD's dad and was with her at DS's birth. They will tell him that he has a bio dad but his birth cert will show both his parents. Is she doing wrong? There is no provision currently to make people prove paternity (or indeed maternity) when registering a child, it's not considered that important! The only thing that is important is that the parents are opposite genders

So children conceived by donor eggs or sperm should have a number under biological mother/father, and have their parents listed under 'parent one or two'? Crap and nonsense. Try to imagine you conceive a child after IVF and a donor egg. You go to register the birth and aren't allowed to put your name under 'mother' but have to stick a number in, and put your name further down?

This is a storm in a teacup for those who think it's wrong, but a massive deal for same sex couples. Birth certs confer PR, which for gay couples can be a massive issue if the bio parent dies. For those who think only bio parents should be named - why? non-bio fathers are named all the time, my friend is going to add her DP's name to her son's BC, his bio F isn't interested, DP is DD's dad and was with her at DS's birth. They will tell him that he has a bio dad but his birth cert will show both his parents. Is she doing wrong? There is no provision currently to make people prove paternity (or indeed maternity) when registering a child, it's not considered that important! The only thing that is important is that the parents are opposite genders

Getting slightly sidetracked here, but the issue with non-bio fathers thinking they are the bio father could be solved quite simply if the policy was adopted that in all cases after a baby was born a paternity test was done, and the father given a certificate which he could use to have his name put on the birth certificate, I heard you can get DIY paternity test kits for about 40 quid, so they can't be that difficult or expensive for the NHS...

Anyway that's probably a controversial enough idea for a thread all of it's own...

I heard they were going to make it a crime to knowingly put the wrong name on a birth certificate. I hope they do. Too many people lie to their husbands when they know it's not their child and people do use BC's a show of spite ie: refusing to add their name or refusing Ex's the chance to put their names on.