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.

Clearly my opinion is that is was snarky.

@WildUnchartedWaters
I think a lot of the hard work has been done there. The parents I know have used books like these and other more general books on the different types of families since the children have been tiny. It then becomes just part of everyday conversation and discussed in the same way as other books that they read together. The children in the lesbian family I know are all still preschoolers but I'm sure as they get older, they will explain more and answer questions the children have just in the same way that parents of an adopted child will need to or or the parents of any other child that has been conceived via donor sperm and or egg.

https://dcnetwork.org/products/product/our-story-sperm-donation-two-mum-families-single-baby

https://gayprideshop.co.uk/products/making-a-baby-an-inclusive-guide-to-how-every-family-begins-book

Thats fine. You can have that opinion. I stand by everything I said in my post, yours was bang out of order.

You need to tell them because it is part of their heritage and it is always better to grow up knowing it from being tiny than to be suddenly surprised by it.
Teenagers and adults conceived via a donor will need to know about this. They will need to know that they may have other half siblings. They need to know because there may be genetic issues to deal with. They need to know because so many people these days get their DNA analysed and go on ancestry sites and fora child where parents have not been honest about their origins it could be very shocking to find their origins are not as expected, they have half siblings they did not know about etc.

As with adoption, where children grow up knowing the truth from being tiny and where their understanding grows as they do, iit makes them much more secure about themselves and their family. If you didn't do this ( about any origin story) when would be the right time to tell them, as they would obviously need to know as an adult?

Right, do you not think that the adoptive parents who I knew well, actually felt that? Because that is where my information came from, they had tried to be kind and not tell him the facts of his adoption. After the event they felt differently, telling him the truth was what they wished they had done. You can discount that if you like, but I am telling you exactly what they said to me.

I'm sure theyd be thrilled that you implied that their lies led to his suicide on a thread that may end up in the daily mail.
Not your story to tell.

I dont need educated in adoption, thanks.

I stand by my precious comment. Their mother or fathers medical information is none ot their business.

Their genetic heritage and family history is their business though. No-one should be lied to about where they came from, be that adoption, donor conception, surrogacy, a one night stand or any other parenting scenario.

Of course it is their business when it is also their origin story.
What about the teenager who needs a kidney donor but realises one parent doesn't even have a compatible blood group or becomes sexually active but does not know they may have unknown half - siblings or the adult who gets a genetically influenced illness and realises that it doesn't match her told heritage.
(We need to allow for the fact that advances in genetics are happening all the time so that even if certain genetic issues are screened for at the point of conception, by the time that child is an adult there may be many more genetic links and issues that can be looked at.)

Teenagers and adults will need to know their origin story at some point. Far better that they grow up with it from being tiny.

There are books to cover pretty much every eventuality!!

https://dcnetwork.org/catalog/books-children

No, you said you wouldn't race to defend them.

I wouldnt be racing to defend any of the other beliefs.

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

I mean, if that means you would defend them and you do agree with them, then it's just another example of words meaning fuck all.

Fair enough. I did say that. Bar sports and prisons.

@WildUnchartedWaters could you please explain why @ScrollingLeaves ’ comment is “transphobic”?

A legal parent and a biological parent are not necessarily the same thing.

Children already have the legal right to find out how their gamete donors are.

The legal mother is the woman who carried and birthed the child - irrespective of whether or not the baby was conceived using her own eggs.

The other parent might well also be known by the child as 'mum', but in the legal sense is a legal parent. This still gives her parental responsibility.

The system is working fine as it is.

I could, but I shouldn't have to.

Even though the 'other' parent gave her eggs?

Nb. That makes Freddie MConnell the child's legal mother. To alter this precedent would open a huge can of worms the family legal system really doesn't need.

The document belongs to the child, not the parent. They have a right - enshrined in law on the pretext that the rights of the child shall be paramount- to know their origins.

My 9-YO knows he's an IVF baby - the biological child of DH and me - by the simple expedient of having come home after sex education at school and asking me. The way I call it is if a child is old enough to ask a question, he's old enough to hear the (age appropriate) answer.

Even though the 'other' parent gave her eggs?

That is the legal position, yes.

Of course you don’t “have” to explain anything. But if you would like people to understand, then explanations are helpful.

My understanding of the suffix “phobic” is strong dislike of fear of something. So “transphobic” would be a strong dislike or fear of trans people.
i think that to state a biological fact about someone is not to state either dislike or fear. Hence, I do not perceive @ScrollingLeaves ’ comment to be “trans phobic”.
it would be helpful to understand your interpretation.

Aye, I'm sure you're really interested in my thoughts. Disingenous.

I'm aware of that. It was me who debunked that earlier in the thread.
What I'm asking is if that's right.

Yes, I am interested. I wouldn’t waste time responding if I weren’t interested.
Are you able to explain what you mean by “transphobic”?

No, you just want to tear everything I will say apart. Seen it before. Boring.

I'm aware of that. It was me who debunked that earlier in the thread.
What I'm asking is if that's right.

Makes no odds. It's the law.

Mum/donor is still the legal parent, a status that carries full PR. As the donor, the child has a legal right to find out who its biological mother is, same as they can find out who the sperm donor is, albeit in this
scenario he will have had no involvement with the child whatsoever. That donor is not the one with PR or who is recognised as the child's legal parent. The woman in question is.

This system lays it all on the line very clearly as to who the child's legal parents are, and who the gamete donors are, albeit one of these happens to be the same person. Given this is about the rights of the child, it seems the documentation as the law currently stands has that covered.

This particular argument has stemmed from a tweet by Kellie Jay Keen, and a backlash ensuing from a response by a lesbian mum, about how the only parents recorded on a birth certificate should be the biological ones who provided the gametes.

I strongly disagree.

ok, so here is my scenario:

i had a baby with a man after a very short amount of time, in a foreign country. he turned outo be pretty mental and controlling and when i was three months pregnant i left him, and the country. i had this baby alone, only my name is on the birth certificate.

i then met a fantastic man when my baby was still small ... we now have two more children together. My first son calls this man dad, and as far as he currently understands, this man IS dad (my son is 5).

two points:

1. I have considered not telling my son that he has a different 'biological dad' - this is very appealing as I would love to pretend that this is the case, it certainly would be easier for our family if thos was thw truth. But ultimately it is not the truth, he has two other half siblings he may want to know. He is also from a very different culture and he may want to explore that one day.

personally I wasn'traised by my father, and i recommected with him a few years ago. it absolutely blew my mind the things we have in common. im actually very much like him, and have always felt like a complete outsider t

Then we agree...I think.