KJK's film out at 8pm tonight

[lochmaree]

@Boiledbeetle plenty of women who are married have donated sperm from a clinic. She has no issue with those husbands being the father on the birth certificate.

A sperm donor is a donor. He is not a father. Having a sperm donor's details on a birth certificate would not be beneficial to a donor conceived child. In fact it would just be confusing as the donor isn't their parent.

Knowing personal details about the donor, his family history and meeting him when they are old enough to understand is beneficial for donor conceived children. Having him on a birth certificate is not.

What issue?

I know it is necessary for your beliefs to pretend that ‘father’ does not mean ‘the man whose sperm united with the mother’s egg to create the person’.

However, reality doesn’t really give a stuff about your beliefs.

Did she say that specifically or are you extrapolating from what she actually said? as I honestly don't know her opinion on that

I personally think that if a sperm doner is used that should be recorded on the birth certificate. The 'father' is only down on there by either a)its implied in law that in a heterosexual married couple the husband is the father (the same assumption cannot apply in same sex marriages as well biology) or b) in an unmarried heterosexual couple the 'father ' goes with his girlfriend and lies.(again a same sex couple can't for obvious reasons get way with this option either)

just because heterosexual couples can get round stating who the actual father is doesn't make it right.

I don't care about the feelings or the sexual orientation of the people bringing up a baby. I do care that the Child that is born has correct information on their birth certificate.

@Boiledbeetle So it is fine for a straight married couples child's birth certificate to be biologically wrong, but not a child born from a lesbian couple?

Birth certificates are a social legal document. A lesbian mother who did not give birth to a child has no legal rights or responsibilities if she is not on the birth certificate. She can't consent to medical treatment, sign a form giving permission for a school trip. These are basic things.

Children born of sperm donor now rightly have a legal right to know those details and to know who the sperm donor is. Donors would not want to go on the birth certificate - for a start that would make them liable for maintenance payments.

To act as if birth certificates are simply biological records is to ignore that birth certificates have real life impacts if you are caring for a child.

And why should a married couple automatically be assumed to be the biological parents? If birth certificates are to be a biological record then every parent should have a DNA test before they can be added to the birth certificate.

I know it is necessary for your beliefs to pretend that ‘father’ does not mean ‘the man whose sperm united with the mother’s egg to create the person’.However, reality doesn’t really give a stuff about your beliefs.

Well the law does does give a stuff which is why adoptive parents and non-biological parents are rightly on a child's birth certificate.

Man A cuts the baby's cord, holds her, comforts her, baths her, dresses her, changes her nappies, prepares her meals, helps her with her homework, gives her advice, and unconditionally loves her.

Man B donated the sperm so the baby can exist.

Which man is the baby's father?

Man B

So it is fine for a straight married couples child's birth certificate to be biologically wrong, but not a child born from a lesbian couple?

I said the exact opposite of that.

I personally think that if a sperm doner is used that should be recorded on the birth certificate. The 'father' is only down on there by either a)its implied in law that in a heterosexual married couple the husband is the father (the same assumption cannot apply in same sex marriages as well biology) or b) in an unmarried heterosexual couple the 'father ' goes with his girlfriend and lies.(again a same sex couple can't for obvious reasons get way with this option either)

just because heterosexual couples can get round stating who the actual father is doesn't make it right.

I don't care about the feelings or the sexual orientation of the people bringing up a baby. I do care that the Child that is born has correct information on their birth certificate.

And a birth certificate should record biological facts that's it's one sodding purpose.

<<An aside>> because of the nature of human reproduction- ie the mother gestates and gives birth to the baby, there is no doubt she is the mother she absolutely belongs on the birth certificate.
As for the father, the mother could be lying about who he is, she may have been raped by him or she may have been promiscuous at the time of conception, so there is no way of being absolutely sure that the man on the birth certificate is the father without a DNA test.
In the past, women used to be socially shunned if they fell pregnant out of wedlock, so it’s not uncommon to have a different man put as father on the birth certificate to make the child respectable/legitimate. I think there is still a bit of that now, so a lot of women don’t want to leave ‘father’ blank on the birth certificate.

In an ideal world the father on the birth certificate would always be the biological father, but because of the nature of reproduction that hasn’t always been the case.

However, this does not mean that we are free to totally misinterpret the intention of the birth certificate and pretend that all it documents is legal responsibility.

@EndlessTea seriously?

What if the child needs emergency medical treatment authorised by a parent? You think the sperm donor should do this?

Do you think straight adoptive parents should have any legal parental rights or is it just same sex couples you have a problem with?

Adoptive parents, irrespective of their sex or orientation, should have the correct paperwork which enables them to act as the legal parent. I disagree that the child should have a falsified birth certificate in order to achieve it.

I am so fucked off with the GRA - this idea that a birth certificate isn’t supposed to be grounded in reality.

A clip in which she says 'I personally have no issue with [single sex couples being parents]'?

This supports your assertion, how?

Thank you.

Please remember this to put the meaning the state of being a woman back into a legal category
www.mumsnet.com/talk/petitions_noticeboard/4758082-petition-to-update-the-equality-act-thread-3

Umm…. Err…., 😂😂😭😂

Plenty of married opposite sex couples use sperm donors or have affairs. You are naïve if you think paternity can be assumed.

@EndlessTea With various fertility treatments are mothers always the biological mother? What about egg donation?

Unfortunately the law has yet to catch up with the many ways a woman can come to be pregnant.

Personally I'd like DNA tests for all children. would solve a lot of issues later on.

But whatever the law says and whenever it catches up it still requires one male contribute and one female contributor. a mother and a father regardless of who actually raises them.

I think keeping birth certificates to DNA parents is superb idea.

Anyway @AmandaJonah when can you make a TERFtalk Tuesday to put your accusations to KJK? Do check your diary for me, there's a dear.

i don’t believe we should be making parents take DNA tests before registering births, it should be accepted that the woman who gave birth is the mother and taken on trust that the man who shows up to register the birth is the father as before.

If, for example, a woman falls pregnant as a result of a drunken shag on holiday and can barely remember the bloke, we can’t really expect the father can always be traced.

However the goal should be mum and bio dad.

Now that fertility ‘treatments’ are available, where doctors implant one woman’s egg inside another woman, it messes things up.

Perhaps the woman’s medical records from the fertility doctor should keep the details of the woman’s whose egg it is and details of the man whose sperm it is and these documents must be brought along to register the birth.

It wouldn’t look pretty, but the child’s birth certificate would be:

Mother: She who gestated and gave birth.
Father: Man who comes along to be registered as father

then have an additional section, headed by words to the effect of ‘medically implanted pregnancy’ and underneath:

Genetic mother: Woman whose egg was used
Genetic father: Man whose sperm was used

That way the child has a proper record of who they are.

I think we should all start documenting the actual truth as far as it is possible to do so.

This is where the TRAs start claiming that all LGBT rights are under attack.

There is such a huge difference between the legal fiction of birth certificates for donor conceived children and the legal fiction of birth certificates for trans people.

Documenting the actual truth - yes always.

Enshrining the actual truth in law when in comes to women's rights and what constitutes a woman - yes always.

Enshrining the actual truth in law when it comes to adopted children and donor conceived children - no of course not.

Adoptive parents would have no legal parental rights and donors would have legal parental rights. It's crazy talk and benefits nobody.

I disagree with you.

Your arguing for legal fiction, not biological reality, on birth certificates is the thin end of the wedge.