Trans people should have right to not only change sex on their birth certificate but also change any child's birth certiticate to new parent identity - Stonewall

[stumbledin]

Let transgender parents choose to be ‘mothers’ or ‘fathers’ on birth certificates, says Stonewall

Under current law, it is not possible to change a child’s birth certificate to include a trans person’s revised name or gender

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/05/24/stonewall-pushing-transgender-parents-mothers-fathers-birth/

(From the new strategy www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4253200-Stonewall-new-branding-vision-strategy-whatever )

So my mum and dad. One of them comes out as trans. Stonewall, in freedom/4 say “And LGBTQ+ couples and parents should have their relationships recognised on all official documents.”

So the marriage cert is amended.
And my birth certificate is amended.

Then the other parent comes out of trans. Marriage cert and my Birth cert is amended again.

And I’m married, so my marriage cert, which has my father’s name, is amended.

My sister plans to marry after the rules change to include mother’s name on marriage certs. Her marriage cert is changed twice.

Is that what they mean?

Keep at it Stonewall!

You’re showing us all how utterly ridiculous you are.

So if I get married about divorced and then my ex husband decides to be trans does he get to alter both these documents? Even though we might not have been in contact for 20 years?

And how will he find me, since I have decided I am gender fluid and change my name on all official documents about once per week?

Maybe in fact this is the point when we say Stonewall is no longer about standing up for and protecting the rights of LGB people. It is now a trans queer group.

Luckily the LGB Alliance is already formed so that just leaves Stonewall trying to soak up "its all about me" members of society.

Its like they have given up pretending what we already knew.

Just such a shame that what should have been a name with a proud history of fighting to equalities has become tarnished by the entryist exploiters.

This is the kind of idea that should just roll around in your head and stay there.

This may be their Ratner's Moment.

re. Kids Company - maybe some of you haven't seen this from earlier this year.

The founder and former trustees of the collapsed charity Kids Company have won a High Court battle against being disqualified from other organisations.

The Official Receiver argued they were "unfit" to hold directorships because of their handling of the charity.

But the ruling cleared former chief executive Camila Batmanghelidjh and the seven others of personal wrongdoing.

The judge added the charity may have survived had it not been for unfounded allegations of criminal activity.

A plan to restructure the organisation's finances had been agreed with David Cameron's government.

But the charity closed its doors in 2015 after the Metropolitan Police launched an investigation into sexual assault allegations, following the broadcast of a BBC Newsnight report.

The police investigation concluded in 2016 after finding no evidence of criminality.

In her ruling, Mrs Justice Falk said the charity, which worked with hundreds of vulnerable children in London and Bristol, may have survived financially to continue its work had it not closed.

During the lengthy court battle, the Official Receiver - a body that looks into potential wrongdoing by company directors - had alleged that the charity's former leaders should be disqualified as directors because the organisation had been so badly run.

In the run-up to its collapse, the charity was spending around £20m a year, up to a quarter of which came from the government.

The Official Receiver alleged that Kids Company's business model had become unsustainable from around September 2013 and its failure was inevitable.

It also alleged that the defendants knew or ought to have known that and should have planned to avoid financial collapse.

The charity's chairman at the time of its collapse, who was also cleared by the ruling, was the former BBC executive Alan Yentob.

Mrs Justice Falk said the case was not proven.

There's more at www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56044000

What is points out to me is just how damaging the media can be, ie the BBC televising the police raid on Cliff Richard's flat, or like newsnight apparently waiting for the best "gotcha" moment to release what were then unproven allegations of sexual assault.

I am not saying this as any fan of CB, but anytime I see the media gathering together to bullying someone they have previously lauded and for one never believe the media - even though they are occassionally right.

And I know the charity wasn't conventional ie it wasn't "social work" but it would be interesting to see someone who isn't biased by media reports to look at whether the methods they used (sometime just handing out pocket money?) actually worked.

And as an example of how women of colour are type cast and not valued for what they might actually be competent to do, CB went from "exotic outsider" to "unprofessional loud mouth" two standard architypes of the UK's racist media.

Wonderful news. For our next baby my DH will be identifying as the mother so he can be entitled to receive maternity pay of 90% of his salary for 6 weeks.

What a crock of shit.

Stonewall arguing that children exist to validate their parent's gender dysphoria.

Wonderful.

Has anyone mentioned this to the genealogy / family tree type people?

What could happen then is that I change my gender to male.

My kids birth certs are updated to two fathers.

Person looking back thinks oh that's interesting, who was the mother? And goes off with a totally wonky idea.

May go off and start searching birth records from local hosps or whatever they do. School records for male me?

And etc etc.

Now I'm not interested in that stuff at all but an awful lot of people are!

The question is. Do these records matter? If they do, should they give the info that is useful down the line? If not, why bother with them?

If I have a baby as a woman and it is adopted. And then change my sex on birth cert. That kid doesn't have a hope in hell of finding out about me. The grandchildren wouldn't. Etc etc.

I understand that in adoptions, it's not unusual for children, or children's children. To develop a real desire to know 'where they came from'. Which I think most people would be able to understand. Won't this fuck things up for them?

And I know the charity wasn't conventional ie it wasn't "social work" but it would be interesting to see someone who isn't biased by media reports to look at whether the methods they used (sometime just handing out pocket money?) actually worked.

They wouldn’t be able to do that because the charity didn’t keep proper records. Irrespective of criminal activity, the charity would have failed much earlier if it hadn’t been repeatedly bailed out by government. The thing Kids Company did do well was sell a narrative to the media. However that will only get you so far, and won’t make up for non existent book keeping and lack of compliance.

The similarity is the ability to sell a brand, and the ability to convince government that the good cause is so inextricably linked with the organisation that the normal rules don’t apply.

@OneEpisode

So my mum and dad. One of them comes out as trans. Stonewall, in freedom/4 say “And LGBTQ+ couples and parents should have their relationships recognised on all official documents.”

So the marriage cert is amended.
And my birth certificate is amended.

Then the other parent comes out of trans. Marriage cert and my Birth cert is amended again.

And I’m married, so my marriage cert, which has my father’s name, is amended.

My sister plans to marry after the rules change to include mother’s name on marriage certs. Her marriage cert is changed twice.

Is that what they mean?

Like in 1984

Exactly OneEpisode - apart from anything else, it's just not even slightly practical.

And the everything else is clearly enough - the idea that you could re-write your own official records is bad enough. The plan to re-write other-people's is insane!

Come to that - aren't witnesses on marriage certificates too?

What if a Registrar transitions!

What if the Director of the Bank of England transitions and they have to change the name on all the bank notes!

Is this anything to do with Freddie?
Narcissistic, much??
It’s beyond sinister.

And what about other countries? Are they going to accept these amended certificates? I can see it causing no end of problems for people applying for citizenship in countries that don't sign up for this. I really think that birth certificates should not be changed. They record what was true at the time of birth and they belong to the child.

They record what was true at the time of birth and they belong to the child.

More than that, they are a copy of information in the official record which does not belong to the people mentioned in the certificate.

The GRA allows some people to maintain some privacy in some situations. However no legislation can hide the fact that the sex of somebody who has given birth is female.

The registrar records information about the birth and about sex. It does not and should not pretend to be able to record innate identity.

Plenty of people have to live with birth certificates and wedding certificates that contain distressing information. They are an official record, not an affirmation.

The register.

The register completed by the registrar?

It would really help Stonewall if they posted their intentions on here first. It would save them an awful lot of embarrassment.

I think something is batshit and then I read these threads, it becomes clear that the something is so crazy it must have been a passing TRA who dropped into the Stonewall office for a cuppa and said 'oooh I've got a good idea'

I think something is batshit and then I read these threads, it becomes clear that the something is so crazy it must have been a passing TRA who dropped into the Stonewall office for a cuppa and said 'oooh I've got a good idea'

Changing someone else's birth and marriage certificate certainly comes under the "what about MEEEEEs" one might expect.

It makes me feel sorry for the people who want this sort of change in their lives. Even if it became possible, it won't help them be the other sex.

Who's job is it to say "yes, we can create legal fictions around you, we can change all your documentation, but, it isn't possible to change sex and have you thought about accepting your body (and reality) as it is?"

I remember SH saying on twitter about being a woman because that is what it says on their passport and certificates. SH presented this as a "gotcha", but, well, I don't read that person as female not even in their written word when they posted on here.

It makes me feel sorry for the trans people who believe Stonewall are doing good - there is such a lot of energy wasted protesting that material reality can be suspended with the right bit of admin.

A birth certificate belongs to the child, and will be required throughout their life. It is not a validation certificate for your parents' personal beliefs.

@OneEpisode

So my mum and dad. One of them comes out as trans. Stonewall, in freedom/4 say “And LGBTQ+ couples and parents should have their relationships recognised on all official documents.”

So the marriage cert is amended.
And my birth certificate is amended.

Then the other parent comes out of trans. Marriage cert and my Birth cert is amended again.

And I’m married, so my marriage cert, which has my father’s name, is amended.

My sister plans to marry after the rules change to include mother’s name on marriage certs. Her marriage cert is changed twice.

Is that what they mean?

Not just that - why doesn't it extend to anything anyone's ever signed? So the vicar/officiant signing the marriage certificate, if they were to change name/gender, would need to go back and re-issue all the certificates from their old names, the university officials on my degree certificates, my swimming badge, all my medical / bank / legal paperwork - if anyone changes identity they should go back and reissue all of these.