Word Mother removed from Scottish governement Policies

[Igneococcus]

In the Times:
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3c959dba-2d2e-11ec-a548-f9bb1ebf6985?shareToken=813627b8a0c3148e479c1a80ef7f5130

Comments aren't having it. Thanks for the link.

Gosh, I wist they would let us swear in the Times comment sections.

The comments are good!

Any word on if they are going to change it - any comment from them at all?

I see that the editor of Pink News had his say in that article. Funny how he knew what a woman was when a birthing body was required for surrogacy. Probably makes it easier if the word “mother” is forbidden.

Funny how he knew what a woman was when a birthing body was required for surrogacy. Probably makes it easier if the word “mother” is forbidden.

Someone posted this on the Nolan Stonewall thread. Not reached that part myself.

I was particularly incensed by Ben’s assertion that in the case of two male ‘intended parents’ that there ‘is no mother’

Growing the baby with two sperm in plant pot is he?

I am so glad this is getting sunlight.

The comments are excellent, not a single one agreeing with it. I am going to be constructing a hefty and lengthy letter to my daughter's school over the next couple of weeks as I went onto their policies and I think they are fully Stonewalled.

My work has removed the word mother from their "parents policy". The only time mother is mentioned in the whole policy is once- in reference to "surrogate mother"- I assume that's an oversight though. They've done the same with the menopause policy. This was all based on the recommendations from the Stonewall WEI feedback from last year.

For context I work for a national (England) NHS trust.

The term birthing person is so offensive. Why don't they just start saying handmaids and be done with it.

“The people who are concerned about this are actually a relatively small but vocal minority,” he said.

Someone seems to be looking in a mirror!

"The Scottish government insisted its relationship with Stonewall was beneficial and productive.

A spokesman said: “The Scottish government is making progress towards our ambition to be a world-leading diverse employer where people can be themselves at work, with a workforce that reflects the diversity of the people of Scotland."

Why is the Scottish Government able to have a spokesman, but no mothers?

The comments from the Pink News body are particularly telling. Is Scotland paving the way for a fully commodified surrogacy industry? That's the only light in which those comments make sense; UK maternity law already covers the situations of adoption and of couples who are both women.

In order not to offend females who believe that you don't have to be a woman just because you are female you automatically offend women who believe that you don't have a choice in the matter

You bow to people who think woman is in the brain and kick the woman who think that if people would only stop thinking your brain is inferior because you are clearly a woman the world would be a fairer and better place

Oh good spot lammy

So - legally you can offend a woman (on the basis of their sex) they weren’t born a woman (and Thai would include refusing to call them ‘mother’). Is that right?

What are the non birthing parents called? Ejaculatory parent?

@Lammysaurus

"The Scottish government insisted its relationship with Stonewall was beneficial and productive.

A spokesman said: “The Scottish government is making progress towards our ambition to be a world-leading diverse employer where people can be themselves at work, with a workforce that reflects the diversity of the people of Scotland."

Why is the Scottish Government able to have a spokesman, but no mothers?

The comments from the Pink News body are particularly telling. Is Scotland paving the way for a fully commodified surrogacy industry? That's the only light in which those comments make sense; UK maternity law already covers the situations of adoption and of couples who are both women.

A lot of this is paving the way for fully commodified surrogacy. I do think some of the money behind it comes from that direction.

The surrogacy lobby almost certainly were an interested party in the case Freddie McConnell brought to remove the mother category on their child's birth certificate.

There are numerous vested interests tied up gender ideology. A lot of them are about money and profit. None of them are good for women and children.

@Lerram

What are the non birthing parents called? Ejaculatory parent?

Dads, fathers, men, males, paw... whatever you like!

In order not to offend females who believe that you don't have to be a woman just because you are female you automatically offend women who believe that you don't have a choice in the matter

It does read as if the mere fact of being born female is a privilege/offence to some groups.

My workplace has an adoption policy and given that the process parents go through when using a surrogate is basically the same ie court then the adoption policy is what would be amended. For anyone who became a mother pre 2000, maternity leave now sound ridiculously generous … it isn’t but having had one DC when you got six months and one when it was a year I was astounded at my female colleagues who had 12 weeks. The original point of maternity leave and the legally required bit is for the mother’s health postpartum.

Why is the Scottish Government able to have a spokesman, but no mothers?

Headscratcher, intit? Women and mothers must be used and not heard.

Fucking hell.

I am so cross.

There will be civil unrest. Never mind the Stonewall riots - if they take my word away then I will march.

www.theguardian.com/uk/2004/nov/25/books.britishidentity

Just unbelievable and sickening.

The surrogacy lobby almost certainly were an interested party in the case Freddie McConnell brought to remove the mother category on their child's birth certificate.

McConnell's lawyer was/is Andrew Spearman, he sits on the Ethics Board of Surrogacy U.K.

Surrogacy U.K. is the secretariat for the APPG on Surrogacy law reform:

Contact the APPG
If you have any questions about the APPG, please do contact the APPG's secretariat, the Surrogacy UK Working Group on Surrogacy Law Reform, at [email protected]k_

Dr Horsey has been conducting research into surrogacy (in support of law reform which will specifically remove the mother from the birth certificate, hence the cross over with McConnell) and a report recently released and discussed on BBC news was done jointly with Two Dads Michael and Wes Ellis Johnson under their newly created surrogacy agency, My Surrogacy Journey. My Surrogacy Journey was also recently added to the official government website on surrogacy, which is odd as other more established agencies are not listed.

Michael and Wes also recently hosted the Modern Family Show, an exhibition in London aimed at LGBT people looking at fertility/adoption/surrogacy.

The charity partners for this show, ie who will receive the donations from tickets were Mermaids and Diversity Role Models.

(Michael appeared in the documentary on C4 featuring Jake and Hannah Graf on their "journey" to obtain Baby Millie.)

I wonder what interest a children's charity, seeking (as they claim) to help 'trans' children, might have in promoting and campaigning for easier access to surrogacy in the U.K?

Is it because these children (like Jazz Jennings and Jackie Green) are likely to be infertile later in life if they are on a 'medical pathway'?

If someone is a trans man who gives birth it is inappropriate to label them as a mother because that is not the way that they would describe themselves.

How many are there, like 3, if even that? Freddy was apparently the first transman in the UK to give birth when Freddy had their first child.

You're really taking the word 'mother' off mothers for a handful of people?

Stonewall urged ministers to remove gendered terms from policy documents and replace them with “gender neutral equivalents”.

'Mother' isn't a 'gendered term', as Freddy found out in court.

Sir Andrew McFarlane, president of the Family Division of the High Court:

He concluded that people who had given birth were legally mothers, regardless of their gender, and said there was a “material difference between a person's gender and their status as a parent”.