|
OK so the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 has now been made Law. We've all seen that and opinions are divided on this as to whether same sex couples should be allowed to produce a child in this way, I don't really care.
However when it comes to registering the child a lot of people don't know that the whole format of the birth certificates (in Scotland at least) has been changed. From 23 September this year when a birth is registered in Scotland on the certificate it will have a box for mother's details and for the father that box has now been changed to father/parent. So there will be or can be two femailes registering together. I was told this was so that every child would have the same certificate and therefore not be embarrassed. However your first 3 children may have the term father in that box and a new son/daughter who was registered since 23 September will have the words father/parent. So immediately he/she has a birth certificate different from his brothers and sisters. What about the embarrassment to him/her? A father recently told the registrar he wasn't happy with this and was told that there was no other format available....in other words his requirements and rights are not being considered.
Also all future death, marriage and civil partnerships registered will have the words father/parent on them for the father of the deceased, father of the bride/groom/civil partner.I don't know about you but I feel the role of the father is being totally diiminished by this Act. As of next year two men who have a child using a surrogate mother will be able to apply to the court to have a parental order issued giving them the right to register the child with mother/parent and father on the certificate. So two men will be on the birth certificate.
Before anyone says, this is not a homophobic concern, far from it (if you know me).
As an amateur genealogist I also think this will cause numerous problems in the future as whole branches of the family tree will stop as a same sex parent will not have a genetic link to the child ( even though they may have an emotional loving link). I think that our records may become a laughing stock of the genealogical world. Does anyone have an opinion on this matter or am I just being pedantic.
How politically correct do we need to become? Why does the records of the majority have to be affected by the actions of a minority. (Instructions from the Registrar Generals Office say that the occassion where this will actually happen are minimal).
What about if in about 20 years they decide that all sexual preferences should not be discriminated against and for example Zoophilia becomes legal. In the US in some states humans can marry their horses or dogs. If this becomes legal here will the name Dobbin or Fido be given as the "parent". I am being facetious and maybe ridiculous here but I am trying to say when is enough enough.
|
|
You can take anti-discrimination too far and I think this does just that. A same sex couple cannot truthfully be the parents of a child. They mayact as such and be excellent , but it can never be gaenocologically possible.
|
|
to take a couple of points....
"So immediately he/she has a birth certificate different from his brothers and sisters. What about the embarrassment to him/her? " Why would they be 'embarrassed' ? by the time they have any interest in their birth cert, they will be old enough to know the format was changed at a specific date and why.
Genealogically speaking there is no more problem than there would be than if there was no father mentioned at all... which is the case for many children anyway...I would suggest that it is down to the parents (of whatever gender) to decide whether they want their child to know that a 'surrogate' mother or father was involved...
After all fertility treatment has already rendered it impossible to be sure if the name on the cert as 'father' (donated sperm) or 'mother' ( donated egg) is genetically accurate ?
I don't think the role of 'father' is diminished ( not by this at least) ... a father is a father , full stop...hopefully a good one, and if so nothing can diminish that!
Rose xx
|
|
I would think that putting "parent" in the father's column might be more accurate in loads of cases.
How many of us doing our family history think our father's line is more important than our mother's - AND YET, how many people can be absolutely 100% certain that the person we call "dad" is actually our father (without a paternity test that is).
I always remember a little phrase someone once told me:-
She's mother's baby, father's maybe!!!
Kath. x
|
|
I'm very unhappy about it. Not so much because of a belief that the role of the father is being diminshed but for the information given to the child - I don't care if a child calls an apple tree and a fruitfly mum and dad, it still has the right to know, wherever possible and if it so chooses, its biological parentage.
For the same reason, I was always very against anonymous sperm donation.
|
