Lesbian mothers should be on birth certificates

[SapphosRock]

Great article from Kathleen Stock.

unherd.com/2023/07/lesbian-mothers-should-be-on-birth-certificates/

It is surprising to me that anyone who supports women's rights would oppose lesbian parents having equal rights to straight parents.

From the article:

Naming a second lesbian parent on a child’s birth certificate is a family-friendly move. Arguably, if you squint a bit, it’s even a socially conservative move — though agreeing probably depends on whether you take, as your baseline, a society where lesbians will have children anyway; or whether you think of it as a cultural aberration that could, with discouragement, be stopped. Either way, putting a second lesbian partner on a birth certificate officially defines and legitimises her parenting relation within the family, allowing the burdens and joys to be shared between two adults, and adding a second layer of protection for the child. Family stability is important for good childhood outcomes, and this measure seems to provide some.

No you don't know me and I don't know you. I believe that facts matter, no one changes sex, only women give birth, only men provide sperm. Identifying as other than that doesn't change biological reality. Pretending that anyone is born with there being a biological mother and father is really just that;pretence.
It's akin to telling a child that the stork brought them or they were found under a gooseberry bush. No parent does that any more do they? But we are supposed to pretend that because a woman feels she is a man , she will then give birth and be the father with no woman being involved. How confusing and factually incorrect is that? And it's the same for same sex couples, no baby has yet been born without egg and sperm fusing.
As I say, stick to facts , it helps in the long run.
If anyone finds facts upsetting, they need to ask why.

This. No child with two mothers is going to think they are both its biological parents. So the mothers are going to have to tell the child a donor was used, and in the UK the law is now that any donor conceived child can get details of their donor when they are 16 and contact details when 18.

Even if they wanted to hide the biological reality from their child, two mums in the UK just couldn’t. So no matter what is on the birth certificate showing their legal parents, the children of two mothers will be able to find out who their biological progenitors are.

That is an awful thing to say about mumaroonis post. I'm appalled.

I dont think you guys personally have done that. Even it you have, the only one worth boasting about is the prisons one, I wouldnt be racing to defend any of the other beliefs.

maybe making a child believe that they were conceived without a man being involved)
Seriously??

maybe without realising, you've entered a discussion that already has ongoing context, layers and layers of it. You're understandably taking posts face value, when there are different strands at play.

This is insightful. I agree there are different strands at play that have caused people to suddenly have strong feelings about reality and biology. Some of these will be down to personal experience and others will be allegiances.

Incidentally my adoptive mother told me my birth mother gave me up because she loved me so much she wanted me to go to a family who had a brother and a dog and give me what life could give.

I was 26 when I learned why.

Perhaps one of tne PP could have been on hand to tell perfectly adjusted 5 year old me exactly what happened to my mum. Cant be keeping things from children.

As much as I completely disagree with the Pp, I agree that women being exhausted by the trans debate is ar play here. Theyve got to a point where theyrr not willing to take the time and energy to be compassionate and dont care who they hurt.

Im adding my voice to those who think the system of recording birth needs an overhaul to reflect that parentage is a much more complex matter than when the current system was designed in 1837.

There are the biological aspects - who provided the gametes, who gestated the child. There will be advances in the future like the child born recently with DNA from three separate people. I firmly believe that every child has a right to have access to this information as it informs them about their body and their genes. And I believe the easiest way is to record it all at birth.

and then there are the social and legal aspects. Who is the person/ people who are going to parent the child, ie take on the legal and moral obligations of raising the child to adulthood. Should that remain at one or two (or more) people? this could be recorded at birth but be amendable for adoptions, and need only use the terms parent 1 and parent 2 if required, as the biologically relevant information is recorded separately.

which information to be used to prove identity and form the basis for ID? Arguably the second one. The first, biological one is private medical information for the benefit of the child. The second one is the one that shows wider society who takes responsibility for the child.

@Hannahsbananas
I don't know if anyone who has done that, just hypothesising that maybe someone might, but the point I'm trying to make is that this goes along with other lies like not telling a child they are adopted and falls under the banner of poor parenting and unwise practice ( for either heterosexuals or homosexuals). It isn't a lesbian birth certificate issue but a good practice in parenting one.

I don’t disagree.

In sure you can see how explaining to a child they are adopted and explaining the process of having two mums yet conceived with a man might not be of similar level though.

Well given you don't know who is posting on here, I'm not sure you can say that. I know for absolute certainty that many of the women who have personally done it are mumsnetters. And credit the site for all sorts of enlightenment. We've even had a book written about our political influence.

And Maya forstarter was handing out stickers saying Radicalised by Mumsnet, last time I saw her 😁

I'm not saying anything about mumaroonis post. You implied posters wouldn't say it to a trans post, and I explained exactly how they do.

And you might agree with men calling themselves their children's mother, men scooping women's awards in sports, and the suppression of free speech, but I don't.

honestly, it's the outside of enough for you to be arguing about a birth certificate, when you appear to be more than happy for the person whose sperm was used to create a child being called their mother!

Actually , children should be told, in terms they understand why the biological mother/father can't care for them. I knew a young man who wasn't told why his mother couldn't care for him. He traced her without the help of social services , he found out exactly why he was adopted, and then killed himself. He had been told lies.

Totally agree with this. Society has changed, we need our legal documentation to reflect that.

If only there was the political will...

Should they? I must get onto the government and tell them a mumsnetter said so.

I'm sorry that man died but that is completely and utterly irrelevant.
If I'd have been told the truth and it was so grim that I made similar choices, would you say the same? Your word choice of lies is awful.

How dare you take the choice away from an adoptive parent, or indeed implu that the parent was in any way responsible for that poor mans fate.

I'm not sure you understand that everyone is entitled to their beliefs.

Of course they might not be at a similar level. I think the similarity point I'm trying to make is that good parents will ensure that a child grows up from being tiny understanding in an age appropriate way what their origins are; explaining with more details as a child grows . This is just good parenting. It isn't an issue about birth certificates.

I agree.

But I'd be interested to hear how you would do that in the case of same sex. Grown adults on here cant understand kt.

im sure there are age appropriate explanations as any children conceived with medical assistance like IVF, sperm donation, egg donation etc should be told their origins. Their parents being same sex doesn’t change that.

I dont agree that a child conceived by IVF (straight conception) needs to be told at all.

The only reason il concede on same sex is because obviously the child will ask.

But for straight conception no. Why on earth would you tell a child that?

Clearly I feel that had he been told exactly what his mother was like he wouldn't have thought she was a positively lovely person. BTW, I am trying to be polite to you, I don't try to be impolite, the snarky riposte from you is really not warranted.
Everyone who posts here is entitled to an opinion, you are entitled to yours, I am to mine. Neither opinion makes either of us horrible people. This is a forum where people can have very different views, and are entitled to express them. Surely that's the whole point?

I'm not talking about a belief. I'm talking about changing a legal document that says a man is his child's mother.

And there's you disagreeing that I should be defending the legally protected believe that sex is real and that it matters!

In fairness children are pretty good.

A female relative of mine, I wont say who as outing, had a female partner who had had a male partner before and went on to have one after her with children involved. That partner remained part of the family. It was put to me that a loved b and c jusr as mum loved dad.

My child response was 'oh , okay,'.

The adults found it more difficult.

Dont think I said that. I said I wouldnt be boasting about any of them (sorry, I missed the sports one).

It wasnt snarky. My opinions stand.