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.

It’s a chat forum. We’re having a debate? No one person’s post carries more weight than everyone else’s, just because you happen to agree with it.

Sorry, realised I didn't answer your question properly.

The way birth certificates are structured should be changed. They are not fit for purpose.

My biological father should not have been recorded as having parental rights for me. Nor should my Dad have been recorded as my only father. They are different things and the system needs to change to reflect how society has become more complex in the way children are conceived and brought up.

Never said I agreed with it. I said it was raw and honest and the me me me post was out of order.

Someone further up said they only listen to the voice of a donor child. I personally put more weight on a mother than a poster who doesnt actually have a clue what they're talking ahout, and above the homophobic posters. If you choose to pretend its perfectly okay to say whatever you want that's your choice.

Seems there are two lots rights/needs at play here.

A minor child needs a record of biological, legal and parental responsibility to protect their best interests in a variety of situations. As does the mother who gave birth.

It might be a fairly rare occurrence but for example I would be pissed off if I was a married lesbian mother who's wife left and couldn't be legally made to pay maintenance for children born as part of that marriage which is a sort of de-facto agreement that you are in this together.

Then you have older children/adults who may want to know and should have the right to know their genetic origins if their birth record lacks the full information for whatever reason- who is (biologically) their mother and who is their father.

There does need to be a way ideally of recording all these things. Whether it all goes on to a birth certificate or we do something slightly differently alongside I'm not sure.

I think a lot of the growing sense of unease people have isn't just about lesbian mothers, although I acknowledge that does happen and may be a driving factor in Italy.

It's the speed in which all kinds of words have come to mean things they were never meant to mean and just how complicated things are getting when donor eggs/sperm, IVF and surrogacy are thrown into the mix not to mention the rise of polyamory and 'throuples'.

So you end up with situations like below where triplets born via an American surrogate mother all having different genetic origins and resulting in a situation where allegedly (and I don't know if this actually happened) they have a UK birth certificate that has three fathers on it.

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/uk-news/uks-first-gay-dads-make-22437443

@WildUnchartedWaters I care about the rights of parents. I am one. But when it comes to birth certificates, it is a document for the child, and so that is who needs to be centred.

Unless you are a same sex parent though it's not comparable

thank you for the support.

Re. point 2. I don't see the irony. But I think you are presuming only a biological notion of heritage, or you are worried I am thinking of overwriting their biological links from their own stories. Do your children sing songs you taught them, that your parents taught you? Do you have mannerisms that you picked up from family members? Do you have stories about great grandfathers who did something interesting? Do you have places that feel like you belong to them, and they to you, because of family history there? Did you learn skills from a family member that you pass on to your children? Are you interested in the people who came before in the story of your life, what they were like, what they passed on (for better and worse!), what they cared about? Biology is only part of all those stories. My children love their grandparents on my side, they are formative people in their lives, they give them one part of their sense of roots. Their children will have the right to find a record that can show them where those songs might have come from, through my mother, through me, to them. My children know also about their biological makeup. Their children will have a right to know where their genetic traits came from. This is another part of their story. Their roots are far and wide. When you jibe my claim that they deserve to be able to trace their heritage, your thinking seems to be that some of those formative parts of selfhood just don't, or shouldn't count, and are false, or superficial, or less important. The birth certificate says, you were born to these people, when you came into the world you came into their family, that is a very important part of their story.

Agree with this.

As you can probably tell from my user name, I make my living doing genealogy. A birth certificate has since 1837 in England and Wales and since 1855 in Scotland stated the biological parents of a child. Mother and Father. If unmarried, mother only in most cases.

I have no problem with two women or two men raising a child together, but they do not both have biological input into that child as a mother and father do. Agree that a good compromise would be to retain the birth certificate as a statement of biological fact (mother/father) and have the option of another "parent certificate" to list the people who are raising the child and have responsibility for him//her.

No because only biological facts matter.

Apparently.

Your words are again beautiful and thought provoking.

Depends on how you view roots really.

My children are rooted in their values and beliefs. They are rooted by the people that love them. They are rooted by the life experiences they've had with me, their other mum and our wider families.

Not to say they shouldn't know their biological roots but the things that truly shape them as people are from me and my partner.

Oh mumarooni already clarified the roots meaning and posted it much more eloquently than I did.

Transphobic.

Can we stop with this?

I agree.

As an adopted person I am somewhat offended I have to say by some of these posts.

No because only biological facts matter.
Apparently.

So stupidly reductive, @WildUnchartedWaters
Are you this blinkered in all areas of your life, I wonder?

@WildUnchartedWaters who is saying only biological facts matter?

No, I am not part of a same sex parenting partnership. I have not walked in your shoes. You are not a donor conceived child. You have not walked in mine.

Do we disagree that the rights of a child come first when it comes to documenting their birth?

You may have missed it in my posts, but I am also adopted. I had the adoption certificate hanging on my bedroom wall for years because I was so proud of it. I am very close to my dad's side of the family, more even than my mum's side who I'm biologically related to. All these emotional responses are completely and utterly irrelevant to the importance of a factual birth certificate stating biological parentage.

And now the “transphobia” claims have started… 🙄

Sorry, do I need to redirect you to your point that it's a discussion chat forum and nobody's point carries more weight just because you agree?I dont remember directing that comment to you.

Biology and believing in biological reality is not “homophobic”, bullying or “transphobic”.

This is just what the high court ruled would be UK law. Any woman who gives birth will be recorded as the mother even if she personally identifies as a man and a father.

Absolutely that @Robinbuildsbears. Facts are what matters.

Yes, but that 'emotion'line that gets trundled outbl when people point out people have feelings is irrelevant.
That aside, you dont speak for me.

And that is how we have another current thread running where a teenage daughter has told her mother to get an abortion because she doesnt want less money going on her and PPs are agreeing because it's a fact.

can I tell my boss tomorrow then that I'm not doing a task for him because hes a rude obnoxious man?

No?
Oh.

Nor was mine directed to you…

It would also be ruled if an awful crime happened to someone and there was no evidence that he person is not guilty. Wouldnt make it hurt any less

I sometimes wonder it the people who write these posts behave like this in real life, going around telling everyone facts. I'd love to see their friendships and relationships. Or whether they just save it all up to say hurtful things on the internet.