Judge is going to rule on the 'landmark' case determining if a child can be born without a mother.

[R0wantrees]

Independent: 'Judge to decide whether baby can be first in UK history to be born without a mother in landmark trans rights case
Transgender parent says being forced to register as the child’s 'mother' breaches his human right to respect for privacy and family life'
(extract)
"The most senior Family Court judge in England and Wales is set to rule on a case involving a transgender man whose baby is at the centre of a historic human rights fight.

Lawyers say the baby could become the first person born in England or Wales who will not legally have a mother.

The baby is the child of a single parent who was born a woman but now lives as a man after undergoing surgery.

NHS faces legal action unless it offers trans people fertility service
Judges have heard that the man had been biologically able to get pregnant and give birth but had legally become male by the time the child was born.

He wants to be identified as the child's “father” or “parent” on a birth certificate but a registrar has told him that the law requires people who give birth to be registered as mothers." (continues)

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/transgender-man-baby-birth-certificate-mother-trans-rights-landmark-case-family-court

UKTELI 'landmark case'

This is beyond selfish of the parent - it's not fucking ABOUT them, it's about their child

If this gets through... and I were 10/20/30/40/ years old when my father decided to change sex and become a transwoman - should/would he be able to change my birth certificate?

Why would a baby have fewer rights?

I'd be less upset about having Parent 1 and Parent 2 but to list the person that birthed the baby with their female birthy bits as Father is not right.

I fail to see how this would benefit the child.

There was a parent on another forum some years ago in another country. They went through the court system to be declared the child’s parent on the bc, not mother and we’re successful (and once had a hissy fit about being referred to as the child’s biological mother). They were rather egotistical. It was most definitely all about them, not the child.

This madness has many serious implications. I'm trying to be careful here for obvious reasons but a female patient recently had an important test requested that could only be relevant for a man. The Dr cancelled the appointment she had been given but reviewing the details it became a concern that there was a man somewhere, possibly of the same name, who had not been given an appointment for an important test as the details and request had been sent for this woman instead. Detective work was required to sort this out. If one or other or both of the people concerned were registered as a different sex or no sex, I don't think it would have been possible to sort this out or indeed realise there was a problem at least until the woman had the test that was not necessary or relevant for her.
Sex matters.

Sorry, slight digression there. I just really hope the judge slings this out. Also what pp's have said about this being a Trojan horse for men to register as mother and erase the actual mother of their child.
If you are still doing the GRC consultation form I think that is a valid point to raise re the question of spousal permission.

Yes countess is right.

The GRA is a travesty.
GRCs are awarded to convicted male rapists in prison, with fully intact male genitalia, to say they are legally Female.
They are awarded to pregnant females to say they are legally male.

They are a licence to kill truth.

I hope the judge has the foresight to see that this one ruling dismantles the act of female childbirth from the entire class of females.

The word female is being set adrift from reality, and the actual females of the world to whom the word was once moored are becoming unrecognisable in law, and unprotectable as a direct consequence.

You can't detach a word from its the people it means, without detaching people from a means of recognition.

There are always two sides to the equation.
Our language, and the people it protects by representing them.

We are detaching females from their protection.

YY Barracker

Excellent post.

It's so selfish, the birth certificate belongs to that child not the person giving birth

Just to join up these discussions:
Also some good points on this case on these threads

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3271504-Transgender-man-gives-birth-and-wants-to-be-recorded-as-babys-father

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3271483-Baby-could-become-first-person-born-in-England-or-Wales-without-a-legal-mother

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3370188-transman-gives-birth-wants-to-be-father-parent

Children model their behaviour on their parents. This is a giant social experiment thats going to have an unpredictable outcome.

https://www.simplycertificate.co.uk/blog/birth-certificates-how-it-works-with-surrogacy

Reading the above, it appears that even in the case of surrogacy, the woman who gives birth is initially listed as mother on the birth certificate- not the biological parent. There's a later legal process to alter the birth certificate so that it reflects the child's biological parentage.

The legal system is just too complicated to bend for a single person's wishes, especially if their wishes infringe on the rights of someone else.

But ultimately I don't think it matters in the wider scheme of things. Society is woke and will carry on with the "pregnant person" bullshit.

Well said Barracker. Ultimately, I see this as another attempt to disempower real women and obliterate their rights. By men.

The GRA is a travesty.
GRCs are awarded to convicted male rapists in prison, with fully intact male genitalia, to say they are legally Female.
They are awarded to pregnant females to say they are legally male.
Slight aside, this really hits home the idea that dysphoria is no longer a prerequisite. There's no way dysphoria at being a woman would allow someone to be impregnated (through whichever means), become pregnant and give birth.
Without the idea of dysphoria public support and concern is non existent for trans people. It's only the trope of "stuck in the wrong body" that gives their arguments any emotional weight. Hence why kids are being transed when they don't conform to gender expectations and then lauded by intact AGPs as if they were all the same.

The GRA is a travesty.
GRCs are awarded to convicted male rapists in prison, with fully intact male genitalia, to say they are legally Female.
They are awarded to pregnant females to say they are legally male.

From recent thread when the issue of child benefit not being paid whilst the child was not yet registered featured in article:

BeUpStanding linked a BBC program featuring a female couple, both of whom identify as transmen and who start a family together.

Be wrote:
"It was difficult to watch two such ridiculous and self-absorbed people.

Here it is. Be warned you'll need to warm up your eye-rolling and cats-bum-face muscles before watching this in case you strain something..."
youtu.be/KOTap-sQhu8

thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3370188-transman-gives-birth-wants-to-be-father-parent?pg=4

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p05t66b

I didn’t realise this had been linked here - I saw it last night on iPlayer slightly randomly.

I felt so sorry for the pregnant partner but totally baffled by it. The baby was eventually born by C section which they wrrr unhappy about. And the partner who bore the child did breastfeed. None of this seems like body disphoria to me - and try as I might I simply cannot get my head around how you might be transgender without body disphoria.

They make a great lesbian couple - non-conforming, non-binary, whatever. Why add on all the misgendering pronoun issues at all?