"Transgender man, 34, loses legal battle to be named as the father on his child's birth certificate as Supreme Court refuses to hear his case"

[Malahaha]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8953783/Transgender-man-34-loses-legal-battle-named-father-childs-birth-certificate.html

Don't know if this was already posted but it's a glimmer of hope that soe judges have their heads screwed on tightly.

Why would the children face discrimination and abuse for having a birth certificate which accurately gives the name of their mother?

That's the really insane stuff about all this. The pretence that they're in danger and they need to conceal who they are.

Imagine if the entire gay rights movement had been about insisting on the need for homosexuals to be able to conceal that they were gay and preventing them from ever being outed?

They're role-playing a bizarro-world version of gay rights. A really dumb one that tries to avoid acceptance.

Freddy's child will have a birth certificate if born in the UK. It will not have Freddy's preferred wording but it will get a birth certificate. They are of limited use anyway- I haven't seen mine for years. It's in a name no longer mine. Why do they always go for such hyperbole?

I imagine the most obvious way that people will know that Freddy is the child’s mother rather than the father is the documentary made by Freddy documenting the pregnancy, news articles in the Guardian and articles by Freddy, multiple tweets and the outcome of a High Court challenge freely accessible to everyone. But sure, it will be the birth certificate that will be “outing” .

I can’t imagine Freddy giving birth in Sweden, because bringing change to UK law seems to me to be an integral part of the process.

@ZingDramaQueenOfSheeba

gestational parent

baby: googoo gege
xyz: aww, look, she's trying to say gestation parent!

Did you just mis-gender that baby?!

I wondered whether for a birth of a British national in Sweden there would still need to be a British birth certificate but apparently not:

www.gov.uk/register-a-birth

The Swedish birth certificate can be used for all (?) purposes although it does involve more admin.

Maybe I'm being thick here, or maybe I'm just blind to the shenanigans now, but - if Freddie is on the birth certificate as 'father', then what is written in the 'mother' box? Nothing at all?

"no birth certificate, or one that opens them up to discrimination and abuse later in life, because it inaccurately lists Freddy as their 'mother'."
So this would be a birth certificate with a name in the 'mother' box and ?nothing? in the father box? I'd presume lots of children have such a certificate.

I genuinely do not see how there being no name listed as father could lead to "discrimination and abuse" to the child. But, I can see eyebrows being raised and perplexed questions being asked of a birth certificate with a blank in the 'mother' box.

Also, I'm not clear - does SJ have a birth certificate or not? I thought it was illegal to not register a birth in the UK, I can see it having been delayed while it went through court, but surely a certificate has now been issued?

@Yepnothatfeeling

So Sweden records trans men who give birth as fathers? What a travesty for their children.

Totally. The rights of the child completely subsumed by the whims of the parents. What the fuck has happened to Sweden?

You know, a thought has just occurred to me about why trans activists are fixated on the birth certificate issue. It interacts with the gender recognition act in an awkward way. Once a person gets a gender recognition certificate, they become for most legal purposes their 'acquired gender'. It is illegal for employers or public bodies to disclose the person's birth sex. The fact of their birth sex becomes a confidential matter. But if a trans man has a child, the child's birth certificate (which is a public, and not private document) must record the actual fact that the trans man is the child's mother, which in English law means the trans man has actually given birth to the child. So a trans man might have a GRC which makes it illegal to disclose that they were born a woman, but the game can be entirely given away by the child's non-confidential birth certificate in which it is legally required to state the fact that the trans man gave birth. There is a dilemma. The GRC says you can't mention the fact they were born female, ever. But the birth certificate of the child demands it. I imagine that what Freddie and other trans men want to do is close this loophole, so the GRC really does mean they become for all purposes their 'acquired gender'. To my mind, this just goes to show what an awful mess the entire GRC process created as it intersects with other areas of law.

Maybe I'm being thick here, or maybe I'm just blind to the shenanigans now, but - if Freddie is on the birth certificate as 'father', then what is written in the 'mother' box? Nothing at all?

I was thinking about this earlier.

I was thinking, in Freddys ideal scenario, would the 'father's section contain Freddy's name and the 'mother' section contain Freddy's partner (if there is one?)

So a child would have a birth certificate which stated that a woman who did not give birth to them is their mother and a woman who did give birth to them is their father?

Won't the child have....questions? Even a child who has been fully indoctrinated would think at some point 'hang on a minute....'

And all of this to validate the identity of an adult who wants to be known as something they care factually, and objectively, not?

Pretty expensive to give birth in Sweden

www.expatfinder.com/sweden/expat-guides/article/having-a-baby-in-sweden/1243

So this would be a birth certificate with a name in the 'mother' box and ?nothing? in the father box? I'd presume lots of children have such a certificate.

I think it would have to show that the ‘father’ gave birth, because it is a record of a birth and in English law a child has a right to know these details and there are legal implications for parental responsibility. It would be obvious that the sex of the person who gave birth was female. In English the gender neutral legal term for this person is ‘mother’.

if Freddie is on the birth certificate as 'father', then what is written in the 'mother' box? Nothing at all?

There was an interesting point on the deleted thread about the end game here being for babies born to surrogates to have no mother named on their birth certificate.

They suggested that this was being funded by pro-surrogacy campaigners.

Won't this mean that the two children in this family will have birth certificates showing FM as mother on one and father on the other? Sure, go right ahead, that's not confusing the children at all....

Freddy has an almost 4 year old child whose birth has not been registered.

This a failure of parental responsibility.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jun/23/man-refused-to-register-sons-birth-high-court

Failing to register your child's birth because of your ideology is dodgy as fuck, whether it's because of your strange ideas about 'sovereignty' and the relevance of obscure maritime law, or because of your strange ideas about sex, gender and motherhood.

Freddy's child will probably be (relatively) fine and is in little danger of falling off the radar because Freddy loves the limelight.

But are there other tm following Freddy's example and just not registering their children so they are not recorded as 'mother'? Will there be, after this crowdfunder?

What are the implications of that?

www.transparencyproject.org.uk/does-registering-your-baby-make-them-property-of-the-state/

www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/if_a_child_has_not_been_register

Freddy needs to grow the fuck up, take parental responsibility seriously, set an example and get this child registered. I don't even care if Freddy takes the opportunity to have another great big public whinge about it. Just get it done.

It is manifestly in [a child's] best interest for his birth to be registered, in order that he may be recognised as a citizen and entitled to the benefits of such citizenship.

I didn't realise that Freddy's child had not been registered. Just when I think that Freddy exhibits incredible levels of self-absorption, Freddy demonstrates new levels.

The GRC says you can't mention the fact they were born female, ever. But the birth certificate of the child demands it.

But the GRA specifically lists 'parenthood' as a state that does not change if a person obtains a GRC (and this is not the only exception);

12 Parenthood
The fact that a person’s gender has become the acquired gender under this Act does not affect the status of the person as the father or mother of a child.
www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/7/section/12

If someone doesn’t register a birth, there’s just a fine and that’s it? I would have thought that the matter would be taken out of your hands and the authorities would register the birth instead?

In the case in the Guardian article the LA applied for a court order to register the child themselves. There was already a care order in place because there were a lot of other issues.

Without children's services intervention it appears there's just a £200 fine.

I would have thought that the matter would be taken out of your hands and the authorities would register the birth instead?

The rules say:

If the parents cannot register the birth (for example, for medical reasons), certain other people can do it:

* someone who was present at the birth
* someone who is responsible for the child
* a member of the administrative staff at the hospital where the child was born

Strikes me that it might be a good idea for the authorities to tell the hospital admin to get on and do it, as Freddie clearly can't.

Just had a trawl. This case is relevant and has pointers to the relevant legislation:

www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5b2897fc2c94e06b9e19ea50

It's a bit different because the birth was over a year ago:

Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953:

7 Registration after twelve months from date of birth.

(1) Where, after the expiration of twelve months from the date of the birth of any child F1. . . the birth of the child has not been registered, the birth shall not be registered except with the written authority of the Registrar General and in such manner and subject to such conditions as may be prescribed, and the fact that the authority of the Registrar General has been obtained shall be entered in the register.

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Eliz2/1-2/20/section/7

----------

The Registration of Births and Deaths Regulations 1987:

Registration after twelve months from date of birth

12.—(1) Where a relevant registrar or a relevant superintendent registrar is informed that a live-birth which occurred more than twelve months previously has not been registered, he shall make a report to the Registrar General stating, to the best of his knowledge and belief–

(a) the particulars required to be registered concerning the birth;

(b) the source of his information; and

(c) the name, surname and address of any qualified informant available to give information for the registration.

(2) On being satisfied that the Registrar General has issued his written authority to the relevant registrar for the registration of the birth, the relevant superintendent registrar shall require a qualified informant to make and sign in his presence a declaration of the particulars to be registered concerning the birth.

(3) On registering the birth under this regulation the registrar shall enter in space 15 of the entry immediately below the date of registration the words “On the authority of the Registrar General”.

www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1987/2088/regulation/12/made
-------------

So yes, no court order necessary. Registrar writes to registrar general with the particulars and seeks permission to register the birth through one of the qualified informants.

It shouldn't be difficult to find all the relevant details because it was on TV!

[quote BatmansBat]Pretty expensive to give birth in Sweden

www.expatfinder.com/sweden/expat-guides/article/having-a-baby-in-sweden/1243[/quote]
Crowdfunder incoming ...

Hold onto your hats.

Thanks, LangClegsInSpace. Certainly seems like the child can be registered despite Freddie's wishes.

A bit of searching found a recent case of a parent refusing to register a child, and the council wanting to intervene:

lawandreligionuk.com/2019/07/08/registration-of-a-birth-re-t-a-child/

If I understand correctly the council reckoned they had the power, but chose to take it to court to confirm they weren't violating ECHR Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life).

I suspect that Freddy was waiting for the outcome of the appeal to register the birth. Now that Freddy has lost the appeal I wonder if the child will finally be registered?

Yes, NecessaryScene that's the case in the guardian article.

Reading more carefully, the judge did not grant an order, he just confirmed that the LA is a qualified informant for the registration because they have shared parental responsibility (because of the care order).

Freddie can do one, I'm sick to death of their self absorbed bs. Why do transmen shit all over women?