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.

Of course you are! But your child is also biologically related to the woman who donated her egg.

If you’re a couple (straight, gay or bi) and conceive a child at a clinic in the UK with donor sperm then you have to use what’s called an open donor. Meaning that at 16 your child gets access to the donor’s profile and at 18 they get their contact info. This was brought in to ensure that donor conceived children can know who their biological progenitors are, regardless of whether their legal parents want them to know, and regardless of who is on their birth certificate. The HFEA also has to record donor births.

There are obviously ways to avoid this, (using dodgy internet sperm or having fertility treatment abroad) but the law can only be allowed to go so far. The only way for everyone to know with total accuracy who their biological progenitors are (donor conceived kids, kids whose parents had affairs or were adopted from overseas etc.) would be to force everyone in the world to be on a DNA database - which feels a bit like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

I can understand same-sex couples getting very sensitive about these issues. But wanting a birth certificate to reflect generic fact isn't a judgement call. (Necessarily, obviously it will be for some).

And yes, women wanting to be recorded as a father, and men as a mother, in order to validate their inner sense of themselves, is making people very jumpy about the entire issue of birth certification, and who it is for, exactly.

One thing that is fairly evident from this thread is that almost everyone has the best interests of children at heart.

I'm not sure why you've chosen a personal attack, two seconds after I said I commended your posts but each to their own.

I admire your gotcha moment, but I was referring to the donor and the parent being anonymous to each other.

Doenst make it less true.

Sorry that was in reply to @excellenfish who said i’d be a surrogate.

A donor.
Could you explain to me where this is relevant to which woman is the legal parent?

🧐

hmm

LOL that was an unfortunate cross post @WildUnchartedWaters. Thank you, that's kind 

This is something I've thought about and discussed at length with other parents of DC children, as well as the children. I am very aware of how fraught the conversations can get, not least because you are discussing other parent's parenting decisions and that is always liable to get personal. I'm not immune to that at all and I have been really hurt by people thinking that I should never have had my son, that every child deserves a father etc. I'm sure @SapphosRock and @mumarooni have also had to face down that kind of criticism.

But we do need to have the conversations. And it's no longer good enough to say that it might be hurtful to parents to have them. We have made decisions to have children in unconventional ways and we owe it to them to listen to their concerns and voices, no matter how uncomfortable those conversations may be for us.

@WildUnchartedWaters I see why you have come to your position. I still think you're wrong. Yes, it may be hurtful to parents, but what matters is what's in the best interests of the child, not the parents' feelings. This applies in all aspects of parenting, and I don't see why a child's birth certificate is any different.

Since I'm 'weirdly aggressive' by posters who have decided they are the CEO of all things donor, from your point of view could you tell me your view on the legal rights? I'd be interested to hear it from other people with experience.

That’s not all that’s at play though is it? We’re discussing the child’s right to understand their biological heritage

The thing is, I dont really have a position.
I just really object to some of the posts in relation to same sex couples and the fact homophobia has become completely acceptable in plain sight. At som point recently we decided that facts and biology were more important than peoples feelings and as I pointed out earlier, and I really wasnt being disingenuous we dont extend this to all aspects of our life.

Would you tell your child.they were fat? No. But biological facts matter right?

I'm genuinely not being disingenuous, and I feel like this across a lot of topics. We are losing sight of humanity in the name of being right and I dont like it.

I understand that, but as you've cherry picked a quote i made in a side conversation with a poster who thought a legal patent was a 'surrogate ', it's pointless trying to give it as a contribution to the wider debate. It wasnt. Love.

I can be. When I'm not being weirdly aggressive.

Nah I genuinely apologise if I'm come across as aggressive. I do have skin I'm the game when it comes to same sex couples.

Fwiw I'm disgusted at what you've had to hear , and I admire your stance on this. Its thought provoking.

As far as I can tell, the only person under UK law who has total say over whether or not they appear on a child's birth certificate is an unmarried biological father who can either turn up and be registered, or not bother. That seems wrong somehow. I agree that perhaps the process needs an overhaul overall, but that should start with what is the purpose of birth certificates and what information is required for those purposes, rather than the needs of individuals.

I think a lot of people would tell their child they were fat.

In the interests of the child. To help them lose weight.

I don't think it's very healthy to deny it. Is that what you mean?

Would you tell your child.they were fat? No. But biological facts matter right?

I'm genuinely not being disingenuous

Well if you’re not being disingenuous, you’re being daft.
Being fat is a physical matter, not a biological one.

In the same way that nobody is denying that the child has a donor but it could be a compassionate discussion you mean?

In years gone by, adopted children weren't told they were adopted. That changed in recognition that children have a right to know who their bio parents are. The HFEA changed legislation for DC children for the same reason.

There is nothing inhumane in acknowledging that children should have rights.

Youce still not answered my question from earlier, my little banana friend. One silly contribution at a time please.

I agree with this.

Yes, of course. And discussing it with children should always be compassionate.

I know this is clearly close to the nerve for you, but you are behaving in a way that makes sensible discussion impossible

is that intentional?