Freddy McConnell appeal today (Transman who wants to be registered as their child's father) *Title edited by MNHQ*

[MrsSnippyPants]

Haven't seen anything about this and it just popped up on Sky News. Hearing continues tomorrow

Newspaper report here
www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/transgender-man-who-gave-birth-21629478

I imagine that Freddy will be called Daddy anyway and the little boy will essentially grow up without a mother, regardless of what the birth certificate says.
As I understand it, Freddy's son is being bought up by Freddy's mother and father, with Freddy living elsewhere. Though I could be wrong about that.

This ought to be the test case for removal of GRC. Intend to live like a man then the process says you can have a GRC. Change your mind and decide to carry a child then you've decided to revert to being a female.

I have to agree - intending to live as a man for the rest of your life is incompatible with then intentionally becoming pregnant. Even if we can't otherwise agree on what living as a man looks like, surely it's very clear that it doesn't involve gestating a baby in your uterus!

In a nutshell. One individual, unhappy within them self, decides to do the one of the most womanly things possible despite rejecting womanhood and then, still not happy, makes everyone else suffer because it's all about them. Get over yourself Freddy, the world doesn't revolve around you.

Dress how you want, call yourself what you want but everyone else has to suck it up when life throws them lemons and so should you. You're not that special.

This ought to be the test case for removal of GRC. Intend to live like a man then the process says you can have a GRC.

But saying men can't give birth is transphobic.

Freddy will never be satisfied.

Freddy can pretend he's the child's father; Freddy can make everyone else refer to Freddy as the father; Freddy can make the child call him daddy; Freddy might even be able to change the birth certificate so Freddy isn't referred to as the mother ...

... but Freddy knows the truth. Deep down Freddy knows.

If Freddy was successful and got this changed wouldn't it still be outing? If Freddy is allowed to be registered as father or parent rather than mother then surely this baby and other babies of transmen with GRCs would be the only ones without a mother listed or a female parent? Unless they're trying to allow mothers to opt out of being on the birth cert alltogether and only have a father register, still all of this would be extremely rare and would invite questions no matter what

From the BBC article:

Hannah Markham QC explaing the reason for the appeal:

"The learned judge was wrong to focus on giving birth as the determining issue when deciding parental role described in an administrative document," she said.

Surely the purpose of a birth certificate is to record the biological parentage of the baby (ie based on the reproductive functions which created the child)? In animal breeding terms, the dam and the sire. A birth certificate doesn't record the ongoing parental role of the people who care for the child as it grows. In most cases it's the same people, but where caring duties do change (eg adoption, legal guardian) the birth certificate isn't updated with the names of the new parent(s). It's a birth certificate - the clue's in the name.

And:

Mr McConnell has said the High Court's decision breached his human right to respect for private and family life.

I wonder how the judges will view that claim, in light of McConnell having participated in a TV documentary about their pregnancy and birth of the child.

Mr McConnell has said the High Court's decision breached his human right to respect for private and family life.

Freddy McConnell made a documentary film (Seahorse) about being pregnant & giving birth.
Freddy McConnell also described his experience of transitioning in a series titled Self-made man during 2014-15

How is being listed as mother on the birth certificate of Freddy McConnell's baby a breach of his human right to privacy & family life in this context?

Telegraph reports the intended aim of the appeal:

"Gender neutral birth certificates which list “parent one” and “parent two” as alternatives for mother and father should be introduced in the UK, the Court of Appeal has heard.

The Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, Britain’s most senior judge, today heard the case of transgender father Freddy McConnell who last year lost a legal fight against the Government’s “outdated” birth registration system.

Mr McConnell, who was born a woman but later legally transitioned to a man, wants to be registered on his child’s birth certificate as the “father” despite giving birth to the baby.

A senior High Court judge threw the claim out in September, citing the “basic facts of life” which make Mr McConnell the child’s mother regardless of his legal gender.

But Mr McConnell is now seeking to overturn the decision before Lord Burnett of Maldon, the head of judiciary, Lady Justice King and Lord Justice Singh.

If successful, his child would become the first in the UK to legally not have a mother.

Lawyers representing Mr McConnell argued that the Registrar General should modify the current birth certificate form to protect the rights of transgender people by offering the gender neutral options “parent one” and “parent two”. (continues)
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/03/04/transgender-man-has-given-birth-begins-court-appeal-battle-not/

Wasn't that the reason why the (previous) court decided not to grant him anonymity during the last case, because he had made the documentary? I don't think it had been broadcast at the time of the court case but I assume its planned future broadcast was enough for the judge to decide he had already willingly forgone his privacy in respect of the pregnancy.

Parent 1 and Parent 2 It’s like something from a dystopian novel. Let’s hope the judiciary put Freddy very firmly back in Freddy’s box.

Bizarrely this is a good thing, it highlights the absurdities of allowing people to legally change sex, which is impossible.....it’s a nail in the coffin for GRCs, I think more pressure must be put on government to repeal the GRA.

"role"
How does Freddy imagine the "role" of Freddy in parenting Freddy's offspring differs from the "role" of any other woman who has given birth to their offspring?

Freddy appears to think that sharing the label for "biological parent who gave birth" with all the other biological parents who give birth carries with it some implication about Freddy playing a different "role" in parenting.

I'm happy to reassure Freddy that the parenting role played by other biological parents who give birth isn't actually differentiated or prescribed differently for Freddy, merely because of the existence of the 6 letter word "mother" which, when recorded on a birth certificate, literally means "biological parent who gave birth".

There is a perfectly good word that covers all biological parents who give birth. Freddy may wish to change that meaning for all the billions of people it currently applies to, into something about differentiated parenting roles, so that Freddy can declare Freddy isn't one of those role players. But the billions of other biological people who give birth probably will resist being left nameless and with a new expectation of role-playing foisted upon them thanks to Freddy's efforts.

Grow up Freddy. You know what the word mother means on a birth certificate. It describes all of us who've given birth, including you. We're not adopting a new, false meaning, and applying it to ourselves just to please you. Play whatever role you like, but the word mother has nothing to do with it.

From Freddie’s lawyer

In society, being a mother is a social construct and for a parent trying to move away from the terms [mother and father] because of their gender dysphoria, then that is an offence to their right to a private life, an offence to their being and identity.

Giving birth is NOT a social construct in terms of the role of mother on the BC. Being pregnant for 9 months - having a uterus - being in labour - giving birth is biology Freddie - get used to it.

Freddie being named as a father instead of a mother would be an offence to my being and identity.

To misgender someone causes distress

Ooh - because you gave birth to a baby - what a surprise. JFC...

Freddie’s lawyer sounds insane.

My feelings when I read the lawyer’s argument: nice try, but definitely stretching things beyond credibility.

In society, being a mother is a social construct and for a parent trying to move away from the terms [mother and father] because of their gender dysphoria, then that is an offence to their right to a private life, an offence to their being and identity
But changing my 'identity' from Mother to `parent 1' isn't a breach of my rights or an offence to my being and identity?
What a load of utter bollocks.
We have to change our language to validate Freddie's delusions?
The GRA needs to be repealed. It is bad law and is not fit for purpose.
That poor child.

If this appeal is successful will this give the green light for trans women to be listed as “mothers” on birth certificates?

It would seem like a logical extension. We seem to be living in the fucking UpsideDown.

Surely someone in power, at some point, will put their head above the pulpit and say enough! This insanity has to stop, surely there must be someone who won’t back down, won’t be bullied or intimidated?

Thinking about it, if this appeal is successful, trans women will have to be allowed to be legally recognised as mothers, how can they say yes to a trans man and no to a trans woman?

Is this not the ultimate in toxic parenting? This person seems to believe that they have the right to decide what their child must grow up believing, so much so that they wish to have it enshrined in law that their child must be compelled to believe this person is their father and not their mother, even though this person actually gave birth to them. This child's rights to an accurate and truthful birth certificate and true knowledge of their parentage will be withheld from them before they can even speak or are able to advocate for themselves.

A child should not be brought up told ‘technically you don’t have a mother’. That is mean. Where is this persons ma/paternal instinct?

When you have a baby your world flips and they come first. Well in some cases, obviously not all. That little person in your arms didn’t ask to be there so you have to do your very best to look after them and protect them. Well that’s my thoughts anyway.

The lawyer actually argued that "mother" is a social construct. This stuff drives me crazy.

It really would make your head explode, wouldn’t it?