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

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Transgender man becomes pregnant after IVF wants baby to be declared motherless on Birth certificate

137 replies

OtepotiLilliane42 · 13/02/2019 03:33

This is also covered in the Telegraph but I cannot access their article.
We have a similiar case in NZ, and I've put the links below. Scout had a baby girl just before Christmas. I am glad that everything went well for Scout and their daughter, but the denial of biological reality by Scout (especially in the Spinoff article) and the transgender parent in the Mail article is really sad. The media in NZ hasn't helped either by its decision to report Scout's story on Scout's own terms. In real life Dads don't get pregnant and have babies, at least human ones don't.
Other transgender parents in the UK have recorded themselves as the mother apparently, so it will be interesting to see where this goes.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6698303/Transgender-man-pregnant-IVF-battles-child-declared-motherless.html

thespinoff.co.nz/parenting/04-07-2018/im-pregnant-and-im-going-to-be-a-dad/

www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/parenting/baby/109558179/kiwi-dad-scout-barbourevans-gives-birth-to-daughter

OP posts:
FlyingOink · 14/02/2019 13:25

Fathers not father's sorry autocorrect gave me a greengrocers' apostrophe

GrumpyGran8 · 14/02/2019 13:25

I struggle to understand this. My uncle is a transsexual (female to Male, had full surgery in the mid 90s) and is disgusted by/absolutely rejects every female part of himself. He won’t even tolerate old photos or memories of when he was female.
I do too Oldbrownshoe. The only trans person I've known personally (MtF) transitioned in the early 90s and had a terrible couple of years. First she went through, and won, a nasty custody battle with the - by now - ex-wife. Then her bottom surgery went wrong and she suffered months of pain and urinary problems before things were put right. Now turning 60, she's doing the typical woman's work of caring for her disabled partner while holding down a job (which is why I respect her pronouns - she's earned it.)

These old-school transsexuals really walked the walk, didn't they? No "Oooh, I feel so much like a woman today - I'll pop on a dress and some lippy, and report anyone who misgenders me." for them!

magicmole · 15/02/2019 11:00

Had a quick look through the thread but don't think anyone's shared this article yet from the Telegraph coverage on the case.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/02/14/mother-no-longer-gender-specific-term-government-lawyers-say/

"Lawyers instructed by the Government yesterday told the High Court that a man “can be a mother”"

ChattyLion · 16/02/2019 00:25

Oink it depends how the donation is done if a man can then be a father. If a sperm donation is just a private arrangement between friends, then the donor can go on to claim legal fathers rights over the baby.

But if a sperm donor is from a fertility clinic then he will have signed a consent form for his donation. Legally this means he is a donor and can’t be seen as the father of a child born as a result.

HeyDuggeesCakeBadge · 16/02/2019 08:08

Did anyone see Jeremy Vine yesterday when they discussed this?

No critical thought whatsoever or that a BC is a factual record for the child. They claimed that it should be changed the parent 1 and parent 2.

ChattyLion · 16/02/2019 09:38

I wouldn’t want parent 1 and parent 2 as the default fields for everyone on birth certificates. I think it’s misogynistic to have no possibility of a woman being recorded as a mother, only as ‘parent’.

A mother who gave birth has done something highly significant for the child and that should be recorded as a fact. It’s not neutral information to the child or to the mother who gave birth.

‘Mother’ on the BC also refers to the mother’s unique role for past 9 months and shouldn’t be confused with her intention or ability or whatever to be a parent going forward and to take legal responsibility which is only what ‘parent’ on a BC describes instead. We don’t use BCs to record a genetic contribution either (rightly IMHO) so mother is really about pregnancy and birth.

People who are adopted have a BC with their mother on, so do people born via surrogacy have the surrogate’s name in the ‘mother’ field. (This is why the pre-woke terminology was ‘surrogate mother’) As I said above the BC is the child’s document the child should be able to know their origins and this also acknowledges the woman’s role in pregnancy and birth. This mother field is clearly relevant whether the woman has a genetic link to the baby or not (if she gave birth, she should still go down as ‘mother’ on the BC even if she used a donor egg) because a mother is the one who gave birth.

Why are we apparently so keen to devalue and trivialise pregnancy and birth? Is it because only mothers/women can do this? Because we seem to think genetics is so important these days that somehow we are encouraged think growing and carrying a baby to term is really trivial? Is that because dna has a male contribution and that’s why we think of genetics as so important? Pregnancy is all and only about the woman so we need to ignore and devalue that? Is it because we don’t know much or aren’t encouraged to see the importance for woman and child of maternal- feral interaction? Is it because of trying to further normalise and legitimise surrogacy, which removes the baby from its mother at birth?
Why does it not matter that some women see the recognition of pregnancy and birth as very important truthful fact to record on a BC? Why’s it wrong that some women see being recorded as a mother on the BC a very important recognition of their unique kind of parenting they will be doing with their baby? That ‘mothering’ is in some way different to parenting or fathering?

If this case is won and we do take ‘mother’ out of the BC options for recording then I wonder if in future will there be campaigning to put ‘mother’ back into the certification- if it ever transpires that men are able to have womb transplants and carry babies to term? Surely they won’t want to be called Parent 1 or 2?

But also this case Isn’t just about not having to put down ‘mother’ on the BC. It’s also around putting down ‘Father’. I haven’t thought through the implications of that yet but there is that to consider too. I wonder what fathers (who may or may not be on BC or whether or not they have parental responsibility) think about this as a potential change to BC in all its various aspects and implications?

HalfBloodPrincess · 16/02/2019 09:42

This is infuriating. My maternity notes already have ‘pregnant person’ rather than mother. It’s a joke.

ChattyLion · 16/02/2019 09:42

Sorry about my spellchecker there Grin
‘Maternal-feral interaction’.

ChattyLion · 16/02/2019 09:55

Princess ugh. Like when they put ‘gender’ where it should be ‘sex’. I always cross it out on forms. I find it particularly offensive when the NHS only offer ‘pregnant person’ being as how we do all know they need to have a very clear grasp of male and female biology in order to practice medicine. It’s such pretence. Are they actually surprised every time a new ‘person in labour’ comes on the ward that it’s actually a woman?

‘Oh look Barbara, well blow me down if it’s not another woman coming in with a baby in her uterus that’s going to come out soon. Who’d have thunk it? That’s going to really skew our statistics isn’t it! Looks like no ‘people’ have come in at all ever. Only women!’

You could speak to your local PALS about that wording or maybe Fair Play for women, Let a woman speak or your local branch of ReSisters could take it up for you if you want to be anonymous?

www.nhs.uk/common-health-questions/nhs-services-and-treatments/what-is-pals-patient-advice-and-liaison-service/

NothingOnTellyAgain · 16/02/2019 11:07

This is about misogyny and men's eternal issue with the fact that we are the ones who can grow babies, which has caused us not a little bother these last few millenia.

If they can't grow babies in men or in vats (yet) they move instead to remove the language from us and therefore our connection to it that way.

It's a sort of aggressive jealousy. I can't have it so why should you? I want it. You have to share it. Who are you to say I can't?

The term mother, like woman, girl and female is a concept as old as the dawn of time and understood by all mammals. We would have known what a mother was, as a species, before we had language.

It's got nothing to do with gender or stereotypes or how you act or anything at all, it relates to biology.

As with everything else this must be verboten.

So we have lost woman and girl. Female is nearly gone. Now mother.

The reason women get so upset about this stuff I think is that in the thousands of years of global patriarchy, our biology was the one thing we had, in common, it was the cause of our oppression, but it also was distinctly ours, and the ability to birth children, even though used against us so hideously and still is, is still a pretty amazing thing. That men CANNOT do.

Of course they want to devalue it, take the language, remove it from us. They couldn't do it literally > men cannot get pregnant and give birth. So they do it by other means.

The fucking ridiculous thing is that everyone knows, EVERYONE knows what girl, woman, female and mother mean.

If they want a word they can have maternal which for me has much more gendered overtones. I describe my husband as being very stereotypically maternal quite a lot, he is more so than me. That's fine. Have the gendered words FFS, maternal, feminine, ladylike, what the fuck ever, most of us never wanted or liked them anyway.

To give men the factual, universal stuff that is all we really have is just, I'm getting really angry about this.

And the consequences of dehumanising women in this process and disconnecting us from it may well be a shift in the overton window>> hello commercial surrogacy, hello more restrictive abortion laws etc

e.g. in nature the idea of taking a newborn animal from its mother is scary and horrifying. In humans, most people still react quite viscerally to the idea of taking a newborn from it's mother, which is why surrogacy makes so many people feel really quite uncomfortable.
Change the language and you are simply taking the baby from one of its parents. Why not? One parent is as good as another, in fact any person is

I am not tying to offend or upset anyone who has adopted children or other similar situations
BUT we need to be able to say that pregnancy and birth are a pretty major thing, that newborns only really know their mother having been literally a part of her for months, that we don't really know if any person is really as good as the one who just gave birth to them, how much they mind being put somewhere else... The fact that we don't know is already a product of misogyny, the idea that say in the 60s a baby was better off in a cot down the corridor by itself than with its mum. Our role and importance is already devalued. Soon to be removed completely.

And also when women speak others say sarcastically "won't someone think of the children?" >> yes because we do, don't we. Of course fathers do too and some mothers are shit and abusive but in general the health and wellbeing and protection of societies young falls to women, to mothers. You can see this clearly in the press whenever anything goes wrong. Who benefits if we are pushed away?

HeyDuggeesCakeBadge · 16/02/2019 11:10

HalfBlood are you joking? This makes me so mad- I AM A WOMAN and a mother, that's not inclusive of men because they can never give birth and that's a FACT!!! Aghhhhh.

HalfBloodPrincess · 16/02/2019 11:25

Wish I was. This is one section but it’s throughtout the notes (others have got personal details on)

Transgender man becomes pregnant after IVF wants baby to be declared motherless on Birth certificate
JellySlice · 16/02/2019 11:27

That is appalling!

Are you going to cross each and every one out and replace it with Mother?

JellySlice · 16/02/2019 11:28

Or Woman.

HalfBloodPrincess · 16/02/2019 11:28

I am not tying to offend or upset anyone who has adopted children or other similar situations
BUT we need to be able to say that pregnancy and birth are a pretty major thing, that newborns only really know their mother having been literally a part of her for months, that we don't really know if any person is really as good as the one who just gave birth to them, how much they mind being put somewhere else

That’s not offensive. The fourth trimester applies to babies as well as their mother

HalfBloodPrincess · 16/02/2019 11:30

@jellyslice I’ve been tempted to but think it needs more than a one woman protest. But been stumped as what to actually do. Will be contacting pals as suggested above.

JellySlice · 16/02/2019 11:31

Parent 1, Parent 2 AngryHmm

How long before the rampant misogyny leads to the father being named as Parent 1? And, as you can currently omit the father if you're unmarried, why mention Parent 2 at all?

NothingOnTellyAgain · 16/02/2019 11:36

Yes I was going to say parent one will be the man obv

Like with the census there was a thread on here and it turned out that filling it out was "womens work" (admin) but that loads of women had automatically filled their DH in as "person 1"!

ChattyLion · 16/02/2019 11:36

That’s great about PALS. It’s really shocking how quickly this misogyny in woke clothing is popping up everywhere in hospitals and schools.
Maternity services is the absolute last place that mothers should be erased Angry

howhasthishappened · 16/02/2019 11:37

@HalfBloodPrincess
Wow that has given me so much rage.
I'd cross it out and write mother!!

HeyDuggeesCakeBadge · 16/02/2019 14:12

I would cross it out and write mother on every single one of those forms - it's wildly offensive and I'm enraged.

Iused2BanOptimist · 16/02/2019 14:14

HalfBlood
Are you in N Ireland /NHS? Or in Republic?
At my (nhs) hospital every last bit of paperwork has a small print code at the bottom which usually names the person/s who signed it off and the year. So it can be identified for reordering etc and whenever it is updated/rewritten. I'll see if I can find an example to show you when I get home. If you can identify the person who signed it off you can send them a strongly worded letter, copying all the relevant hospital/trust bigwigs - head of midwifery/lead obstetrician/ trust chief exec etc

PaleBlueMoonlight · 16/02/2019 14:21

I actually cannot believe that HalfBlood. The icing on the cake being that apparently it is ok to use the word "father".

Iused2BanOptimist · 16/02/2019 14:29

Ha. "Biological Father"
Notwithstanding some pregnant people won't know for sure who it was that impregnated them!

OvaHere · 16/02/2019 14:34

WTF halfblood

How fucking dare they remove mother yet still allow men to be biological father.

I would take some tippex and a pen to every mention of pregnant person and also put a complaint in.