Pregnant Dad-to-be

[Blocker]

"I hope it's human". www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/parenting/pregnancy/expecting/108554713/pregnant-kiwi-dadtobe-getting-ready-to-welcome-first-child-around-christmas?cid=app-iPhone

Apologies for the ridiculously long link (hope it works), I'm on my phone.

Maybe it's the fact I'm 39 weeks pregnant myself but the phrase "chest-feeding" does make me feel a little ill.

Interesting that apparently in NZ Scout can be put down as the Father on the birth certificate, and since a sperm donor was used, completely eliminates the concept of "mother"

Jezebelz many people suffer from mental health issues yes, but this woman clearly states that she's mentally ill. That's quite different. This is one case where someone should not be having children.

I agree that it would be much better to get rid of gendered concepts of what it means to be a mother, and just stick with clear language. (Although, again, once you start getting into the ins and outs of birth certificates that becomes less easy).

However as far as I can see Scout is just following the law as it applies in NZ. At the point where somebody has the support of the law it is difficult to argue that they are lying.

I also agree that Scout’s mental health is irrelevant.

PerverseConverse

1. Suffering with your mental health and being mentally ill are one and the same

1. Unless there is a serious risk to the wellbeing of the unborn child (which in this case there isn't) nobody has the right to dictate who should and should not have children

I've name changed for this.

Jezebelz to quote you "ask any adoptive parent, any non birth mother, what is more important, truth or love?"

Do you have no understanding just how offensive your words are? I am so incredibly upset that you could even think this.

I am adopted and have known many fellow adoptees. We were all told that we were adopted as children and ALL of us have struggled with this knowledge. We have all struggled with understanding who we are, where we came from, how we fit in, we have all felt absolute worthlessness because we were not wanted by our birth parents (regardless of the reason behind our adoptions) and feelings of being unlovable.

As hard as the knowledge of our adoptions have been for us, it was our right to know the truth. Our human right.

The alternative of not knowing, of being forced to live a lie without our consent would have been both cruel and unbelievably damaging.

I was contacted by a charity in my late twenties asking if I was "my name" born on my DOB asking me to contact them as one of my birth parents was trying to find me. Can you imagine if I has not known of my adoption?

I have no familial medical history which has been important to know. I discovered I carried a genetic disorder when I was pregnant and had I not known I was adopted I certainly would have discovered it then. Can you imagine how devastating and stressful that would have been for me?

I know of one adoptee that if they had not known they were adopted and had discovered it due to a very serious medical reason they were going through, it would have destroyed them.

You have brought up your child with the truth. That they have two mummies. I do not know the age of your child but I assume that you will also tell them the truth of how they came to be conceived. That donor sperm was used. So that you both could have your loving family.

The welfare and rights of children should always come first. Lying to children about something so important as adoption or who their mother is (when known as many adoptions including mine were closed) is not in the children's best interest. Truth and facts are vital to childrens mental health.

So to answer your question the answer will always be TRUTH and LOVE.

NameChangedAsThisIsPersonal I'm truly sorry if I offended you. I'm adopted as well as it happens.

I was not suggesting that adoptive parents should lie to their children, I was referring to the fact I call my mother 'mum' even though she didn't give birth to me.

What is more important? Calling the person who loves me and who I consider to be a mother my mother or to insist on the 'truth' and only use that term for my biological parent? That's what I meant by 'what's more important, truth or love?'

jezebelz

It’s different because the child will have a mother. but the mother will be denying that and telling the child they are the father.

This is not in any way like an adopted child calling an adoptive parent mum. It’s nothing like calling one of your lesbian parents mum and one mama.

1. It’s willfylly denying the child honest information about where they came from - that is the right of the child
2. It’s forcing the child into a state of cognitive dissonance that denies reality - you yourself upthread say the child will know the parent is female. But they will be daily made to deny that. That is not in the child’s best interests
3. It denies the child accurate legal and historical documentation when that information is known. That’s not like having an unknown father.

And I’ll ask again- why are you drawing a false equivalence with lesbian parents when being trans is not a sexual orientation ?

I understand that I have two mums. The woman who carried and gave birth to me and chose to give me up for adoption and my mum who adopted me, who nurtured me, raised me, suffered through my teen-age years and who loves me.

My mum (adopted) is my mum. In every sense of the word. She just didn't give birth to me. She has since I was 6 weeks old been my mum and she always will be my mum.

I needed to know and understand my history to become the person I am. All of my history, no matter how hard and upsetting some of it has been to know.

Your child has two mums. The truth is they have two mums. Two mums that love them unconditionally. You would never say they have only one mum (their biological mum) because that isn't the truth.

I know my birth history. I was given all my social workers notes by the charity that contacted me when my birth parent wanted to contact me. I am lucky that I know the story of how I came to be adopted and why my birth mother chose to have me adopted. She will always be my mum. Calling her anything else would be rewriting her and my history. It would be a lie.

The truth is so important to me. I hate lies and I despise lying. Perhaps my adoption has something to do with this. I don't know.

Truth and love. Always truth and love.

I also think there is an enormous difference between not being told that you are adopted and being told that the person who carried and gave birth to you is your dad.

The adoption one is living an unknown lie, presumably because the adopted parents think it is too difficult/ too painful for them/ was never the right time, actually I honestly cannot think of any good reason why you would keep the truth of adoption from an adopted child.

The second one is forcing a child to lie and live a lie even though everyone probably knows the truth. Simply because the wants and needs of the biological mother somehow trumps what is best for the child. That can never be in the best interest of the child.

I feel desperately sorry for the mother/father in this story as they seem like such a confused and unhappy person but the rights of the child to have a correct birth certificate is paramount.

NameChangedAsThisIsPersonal

Bowlofbabelfish

What could Scout do to make the situation okay in your eyes?

Jezebelz, can you admit that it might be a bit of a headfuck for a child to be told that their mum is actually their dad? The whole relationship is founded on a lie. That’s really damaging.

Bring the child up with age appropriate truth.

Give them the correct information on their birth certificate. It is the certificate the child has for life. Their story is connected to their birth certificate, not their mother/father's.

I don't understand how you cannot see this. The birth certificate isn't the parents, it's the childs document.

We as adoptees have two birth certificates. Our original birth certificate and our adopted birth certificate. I have never seen my original but I know I could get a copy should I wish.

Perhaps a solution is for the same to be issued. The one where the child correctly has Scout named as their mother and a shorter one explaining the changes. Then the child can have the correct document and one that suits Scout.

I don't honestly know but this may be a compromise.

NameChangedAsThisIsPersonal two birth certificates makes sense.

What could Scout do to make the situation okay in your eyes?

Give the child the birth certificate that is theirs by right, with each parent listed in the biologically correct manner.

I think there is a bit of confusion about what Scout is trying to do and what the law legally allows Scout to do.

Scout, and the law in NZ, apparently believe that 'male' and 'female' can refer to gender and not sex. It is therefore possible for a man to give birth because a woman can be a man because they have a male gender.

The person who gives birth is listed on the birth certificate. I would call this person a woman. The law in NZ allows that person to be listed on the birth certificate as a man. However the NZ law is not pretending that the person who I would call the mother didn't exist. They are just listing them as a man because apparently in NZ birth certificates refer to the gender of the parent. (I would be furious about the implication that my gender, not sex, is listed on any official document, but I'm not about to start fighting that battle in NZ!)

No woman has to provide correct information about the father on the birth certificate although if Scout were in the UK the child would have a right to information because the father is a sperm donor.

I don't understand how a child with a trans parent who everybody knows is trans is 'living a lie'.

Give the child the birth certificate that is theirs by right, with each parent listed in the biologically correct manner.

The problem is that it then follows that everybody needs a biologically correct birth certificate and the practical implications of that are quite difficult to overcome.

There’s a big difference between incorrect info because the father or mother isn’t known (for example a foundling) and deliberately recording incorrect information to validate a parent

Having a birth certificate and an adoption certificate for an adopted child is necessary and also reflects reality. Having a mother listed as a father on a birth certificate is unnecessary and is a lie. So no comparison really.

The argument ‘well we might as well allow people to put false information on official documents because some mothers are unsure of the father’ doesn’t really hold water

It isn’t a ‘lie’ if in NZ law the person who gives birth can be listed as the father. It would only be a lie if everybody was pretending that Scout was the biological father. That cannot be possible unless somebody else is listed as the birth mother.

Scout could presumably marry a woman and be listed as the father incorrectly, but it would hardly be the first time.

It doesn’t reflect reality. It doesn’t benefit the child in any way.

Although if scout were listed as the father it wouldn’t be incorrect, just the way the law works because as mentioned before where fathers are concerned the law is more concerned with relationship to mother than relationship to child.

But again, a lot of people have birth certificates that don’t reflect reality, knowingly or unknowingly. In Scout’s case the situation is actually pretty clear. Scout gave birth and is trans.

Every human on the planet has a mother except this child. I find that unspeakably sad

No, this child has a mother, they just don’t refer to themselves as a mother because they are trans.

Plenty of children don’t have mothers or indeed any parents and yes that is unspeakably sad.