Aelwydd Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 A married Texas couple who are the biological parents of twins can't be listed on the birth certificate due to Texas law nonsense, or even adopt them. http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/listen-even-after-dna-testing-texas-judge-denying-gay-dads-on-birth-certificates-of-their-kids/discrimination/2014/06/18/89481 The men had the child through a surrogate. The surrogate is the only parent listed on the birth certificate. Ironically, she is not the biological parent of the twins. Posting these here because of the interest in the Pelletier case. This seems on the same vein. Kind of a strange case. It seems like the men have custody of the babies but no legal connection? So, it's ok now to deny parental rights to homosexuals, because that would be caving into "special interests" if we acknowledged the biological and fundamental rights of the fathers in this case? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aelwydd Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 The Fox news article indicates that other gay parents have adopted in TX, so it's not like they were going in there looking for / expecting a fight. Having said that, I don't think I would choose to live in Texas if I were gay and married. But, hopefully nonsense like this lead to clarification of the laws. I reside in Texas. I know of a family with two moms, who have adopted children together. One of their daughters was in a class with my ds when he attended public school. One of the moms told me how careful they have to be choosing things like which Girl Scout group they can join, which church they can attend, etc. I'm straight and married, and I wish I could move out of this state. My job keeps me here for the time being. (BTW, I'm a 4th generation native Texan, with Native American roots. Not just some "transplant" flappin' my lips.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aelwydd Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 DH just quipped, if they are not listed on the birth certificates, who's the father? The Holy Ghost? :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 This is all terribly sad. I cannot imagine why they would not list the biological parents on the birth certificate. I hope all the states are soon the same on such issues so people don't have to live in fear for their family. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maize Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 DH just quipped, if they are not listed on the birth certificates, who's the father? The Holy Ghost? :lol: At birth, they would not have been able to identify which man was the father of which child--that had to wait for paternity testing. Unknown fathers are left off of birth certificates all the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unsinkable Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 At birth, they would not have been able to identify which man was the father of which child--that had to wait for paternity testing. Unknown fathers are left off of birth certificates all the time. This part I understand. But after each dad was identified, why couldn't they be added? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maize Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 This part I understand. But after each dad was identified, why couldn't they be added? the articles are not entirely clear, but it sounds as if instead of each father petitioning to have his name added to his bio son's certificate they petitioned together to have both names added to both certificates, and the judge ruled that they could not legally do so. If that is the case, it should not be a problem to turn around and petition separately to have their names added to their bio baby's certificate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aelwydd Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 At birth, they would not have been able to identify which man was the father of which child--that had to wait for paternity testing. Unknown fathers are left off of birth certificates all the time. And that can be remedied. The fact that DNA findings are not enough to add the names is what I question. I have a relative who had a child, initially did not name the father, but later had his name added. Here is Texas' procedure for adding a father to the birth certificate. The fact that the judge is disallowing something that is not at all uncommon is what is galling to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy101 Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 You have no idea how you would feel if you couldn't have children. Don't pretend you do.Again that's nonsense. One, I never said I did know how it feels to not have children. Two, again, the wanting to do something does not make doing it right. It is one thing to have empathy for someone's feelings. I can have empathy for their desire to have a child and still think how they are going about it is very wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caroline Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Again that's nonsense. One, I never said I did no how it feels to not have children. Two, again, the wanting to do something does not make doing it right. It is one thing to have empathy for someone's feelings. I can have empathy for their desire to have a child and still think how they are going about it is very wrong. This is nonsense. Besides quoting the Carholic Church, which in no way determines the laws in this country, you have given no reason for IVF or surrogacy to be illegal. Your religious views have absolutely NOTHING to do with my uterus. And by saying this, you are saying your kids have more right to be alive than other people's kids. That other people's kids are wrong for even existing. Nonsense. You really don't have any idea what you are talking about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maize Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 And that can be remedied. The fact that DNA findings are not enough to add the names is what I question. I have a relative who had a child, initially did not name the father, but later had his name added. Here is Texas' procedure for adding a father to the birth certificate. The fact that the judge is disallowing something that is not at all uncommon is what is galling to me. The legal hang up may also be that a part of their petition was the removal of the surrogate mother's name. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aelwydd Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 The legal hang up may also be that a part of their petition was the removal of the surrogate mother's name. Possibly. Living in this state, with its jacked up legal and political landscape--- it's not likely. Again, birth certificate changes are not infrequent in this state. And neither is throwing barriers up to recognizing gay rights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aelwydd Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 I know I have seen numerous study reports over the years about infants recognizing and responding to their mother's smell and voice as newborns. I do believe that infants bond in the womb, and while I acknowledge that infant adoption is sometimes best for all parties, it seems callous to me to intentionally conceive and carry a baby without planning to honor that bond by nurturing and raising the child. I cannot imagine that losing the mother he/she has known for nine months as a newborn has no negative effect on the baby. And yet, those women who conceive by rape are often strongly "encouraged" to choose life by going the adoption route. So, it's callous if it's a couple who desire a child, and plan to nurture it and care for it, because it involves a surrogate--someone who willingly chose to undergo pregnancy. But it's not callous to want to compel women, who have no chosen to be impregnated, to carry to term, with no wish or desire to have a baby, so the baby may then be sold--oops, I mean, lovingly adopted by another family. I'm not against adoption at all. I'm not against women choosing to carry a baby to term that was forced upon her. I'm just against these kinds of emotional judgments of a woman's decision to either carry or not carry a baby, based upon other parties' own agendas or personal beliefs. My own personal opinion is a bit biased, though, having known someone who chose to be a non-biological surrogate for friends, who had lost a child to cancer, and could not carry another baby to term because the wife had also suffered from cancer. They now have a child because of my friend's gift. There's nothing callous at all about that--sacrificial, generous, incredibly charitable--yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maize Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 And yet, those women who conceive by rape are often strongly "encouraged" to choose life by going the adoption route. So, it's callous if it's a couple who desire a child, and plan to nurture it and care for it, because it involves a surrogate--someone who willingly chose to undergo pregnancy. But it's not callous to want to compel women, who have no chosen to be impregnated, to carry to term, with no wish or desire to have a baby, so the baby may then be sold--oops, I mean, lovingly adopted by another family. I'm not against adoption at all. I'm not against women choosing to carry a baby to term that was forced upon her. I'm just against these kinds of emotional judgments of a woman's decision to either carry or not carry a baby, based upon other parties' own agendas or personal beliefs. My own personal opinion is a bit biased, though, having known someone who chose to be a non-biological surrogate for friends, who had lost a child to cancer, and could not carry another baby to term because the wife had also suffered from cancer. They now have a child because of my friend's gift. There's nothing callous at all about that--sacrificial, generous, incredibly charitable--yes. Strange you should bring abortion into this discussion. I can think of no better example of callousness towards a baby. :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Can we keep the thread on topic rather than take it down avenues that will get it shut down? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maize Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Can we keep the thread on topic rather than take it down avenues that will get it shut down? But arguing over controversial issues is such a great distraction from feeling sick and miserable... :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aelwydd Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Strange you should bring abortion into this discussion. I can think of no better example of callousness towards a baby. :( I can. The callousness of reducing women to having less say over her autonomy than than a non-sentient lifeform (fetus). (And I am not a fan of abortion, BTW.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aelwydd Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Can we keep the thread on topic rather than take it down avenues that will get it shut down? Is reproductive choice now off the table of legal discussions here? I haven't been on here that regularly lately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caroline Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Can we keep the thread on topic rather than take it down avenues that will get it shut down? Sorry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Is reproductive choice now off the table of legal discussions here? I haven't been on here that regularly lately. Not that I am aware of but such threads that become contentious are generally shut down. People never agree when it comes to abortion and it is an emotional topic on all sides of the issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idnib Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Not sure what you are saying here. Which objection doesn't make sense? Concerns about disruption of maternal/infant bonding? Concerns about creating and then discarding excess embryos? Also not sure what you mean by the will of God. I believe every person is a child of God in a spiritual sense, but certainly human parents are usually responsible for the decisions that lead to conception. I'll PM you per people's requests to stay on topic. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aelwydd Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Not that I am aware of but such threads that become contentious are generally shut down. People never agree when it comes to abortion and it is an emotional topic on all sides of the issue. That's true. But, it is hard to remain quiet sometimes, because I feel that so much emphasis on put on one party's welfare to the dismissal of the other's, and I feel that as a society, these attitudes are becoming hardened. The affront of someone assuming to have the higher moral ground is what angers me, not that someone would hold a different opinion on the subject. These are very complex matters--I get that. What I don't like is the assumption that the other side is so "evil" as to hardened to the suffering of others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy101 Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 This is really harsh, .. She could just as easily have been grateful by how much her parents worked to have her. Feeling her life is "the result of one big payday" is a possible conclusion out of many she could have reached. She mentions that she thinks it is terribly disrespectful and dismissive to say such a thing and I agree with her. Because while no one seems to have a problem saying that to her about her feelings over her conception, many seem to refuse to say the equivalent to her parents. If it is okay to say that to her, then why is it not okay to say to those who would choose IVF "Those people could just as easily be grateful for adoption. Feeling their baby's life must be the result of a certain biological makeup seems a harsh conclusion for growing their family." As far as the needs of the child being considered...well, it seems like they are more considered in this case than many other "accidental conceptions" where the child is not considered *period*. Yes, it is very sad that in many cases the child is not considered prior to it being conceived. But at least in these cases there are parents who *want* a child and hopefully are somewhat prepared to give it a good life. That is more than can be said for many other cases. I don't know about that. I would suspect that how much the child is considered can vary widely regardless of the method used to grow the family. I wouldn't presume they necessarily put more or less consideration in it. One can be very grateful and still be very disturbed by what they view as wrong. For example, a woman who suffers an unnecessary and awful delivery of her baby in an abusive environment should not be told to just be glad her and her baby are alive. But they are told that every single day. As though speaking out about something that is wrong somehow negates how much they are glad to be alive or have their baby. It doesn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plateau Mama Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Is it because they tried to do it all at once? If they had done it as a series of actions, would they have been able to at least be on their bio kids' birth certificates? This would be my guess. I know at least one gay couple that as adopted their partners kid, in TX. It was a female couple. They weren't married (wasn't an option back then, 14+ years ago). They each had a child with a sperm donor. The same sperm donor was used for both children so the boys were 1/2 brothers. The one had a child and the girlfriend adopted him. Then a few years later the other had a child. I can't confirm for sure the adoption went thru because I lost contact with her before it was official. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kathryn Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 It's really just bigotry. My husband is listed as the biological parent on the birth certificate and he like lots of other dads aren't even ever required to prove that. A woman could in theory name anyone. In my state, they have to be married or the man has to agree to be on the birth certificate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Each time I had a baby (one in California, two in Germany), I had to show a marriage certificate when they filled out the birth certificate. I can understand why both dads aren't appearing on the birth certificate, but I don't understand why the bio dad in each case wasn't listed. It is strange. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
umsami Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 No need to show a marriage certificate in NY or FL where I've given birth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy101 Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 In my state, they have to be married or the man has to agree to be on the birth certificate. Here too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrub Jay Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Each time I had a baby (one in California, two in Germany), I had to show a marriage certificate when they filled out the birth certificate. I can understand why both dads aren't appearing on the birth certificate, but I don't understand why the bio dad in each case wasn't listed. It is strange. Interesting! That must have changed in CA because I didn't have to for either of mine (almost 9 years old and a 1 year old). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy101 Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 So what happens if you're not married ?The father has to show ID, sign that he understand the legal ramifications, get the mother's permission to sign, and then he can sign with a witness present. Actually even married there has to be a witness watch the father sign after checking his ID. Oh and they ask the father if he wants a paternity test prior to signing. He can decline that if he wants. I have a nephew who is not the father of his girlfriends baby, but he signed the birth certificate and that's what he had to do. ETA: No paternity test was done. He met her when she was 6 months pregnant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Interesting! That must have changed in CA because I didn't have to for either of mine (almost 9 years old and a 1 year old). My dd born in California is 18, so it was a long time ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caroline Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Same here. There really was nothing at all to it. Thinking about that now it seems somewhat crazy. But yeah it didn't involve much of anything. Same here. I am thinking when I checked into the hospital I showed my drivers license and insurance card. Probably? But the birth certificate, I just filled out and turned in at the hospital. I don't think my DH had to sign because I remember thinking I could put anything on the form for the kids' names and he wouldn't know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajfries Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Wow. To get my kids' birth certificates I just filled in the form and posted it off. I can't even remember if we both needed to sign it. Guess we're a trusting lot down under :) I'm pretty sure that's all we had to do here, too (in Washington state). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Yeah this was a bit weird when we went to get German passports for the kids. I think we did have to show a marriage certificate and I had to sign stuff. Although, again, a marriage certificate isn't exactly proof. In Germany we both had to have our birth certificates and marriage license translated into German and turn in both the originals and translations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldberry Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 The father has to show ID, sign that he understand the legal ramifications, get the mother's permission to sign, and then he can sign with a witness present. Actually even married there has to be a witness watch the father sign after checking his ID. Oh and they ask the father if he wants a paternity test prior to signing. He can decline that if he wants. I have a nephew who is not the father of his girlfriends baby, but he signed the birth certificate and that's what he had to do. ETA: No paternity test was done. He met her when she was 6 months pregnant. Wow...that is quite a process, but it makes more sense than the woman just getting to say whatever and then the guy has to have a DNA test to prove he is NOT the father. But then what if the actual father refuses to do all those things? What happens then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farrar Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 I find the process for getting on the birth certificate as the father just crazy in some places. Someone I know was the acknowledged father of a child but the mother wouldn't put him on the birth certificate because they'd broken up. He needed a ton of money fast to get on it for all the lawyers and legal stuff. He didn't get it in time and lost his window. The birth certificate can't be changed for many years now and he can't challenge it or know his kid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldberry Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 She mentions that she thinks it is terribly disrespectful and dismissive to say such a thing and I agree with her. Because while no one seems to have a problem saying that to her about her feelings over her conception, many seem to refuse to say the equivalent to her parents. If it is okay to say that to her, then why is it not okay to say to those who would choose IVF "Those people could just as easily be grateful for adoption. Feeling their baby's life must be the result of a certain biological makeup seems a harsh conclusion for growing their family." I don't know about that. I would suspect that how much the child is considered can vary widely regardless of the method used to grow the family. I wouldn't presume they necessarily put more or less consideration in it. Here is what the article said: When Jessica Kern gave evidence to lawmakers in Washington, DC, last summer opposing the legalization of surrogacy in the district, she was pointedly asked why she wasn’t grateful for the procedure that created her. “The question was so simple and dismissive,†she recalls. “Like I would choose this for myself? When the only reason you’re in this world is a big fat paycheck, it’s degrading.†She is saying that the only reason she is in this world is a big fat paycheck. That is her viewpoint and it's horribly sad and I think has much more than surrogacy at it's core. I would guess there are plenty of other surrogacy children who think they are in the world because their parents wanted them so much they were willing to jump through all kinds of hoops to have them..or because of God...or any number of other reasons. That doesn't invalidate her feelings...but I think it does show that there is something else going on there besides surrogacy. And your comment about people pursuing IVF being criticized for not pursuing at adoption...um, yeah, that happens all the time. My point in the second part was...children are never in control of their conception and they never get to choose. So saying this particular route takes that choice away is a moot point. Kids are often conceived under much less ideal circumstances than by a surrogate for parents who really want them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
busymama7 Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 I file birth certificates in the state of nv. If the parents are married it is assumed the husband is the father and the cert is filed that way. If the mother is unmarried, the father must sign and have notorized an affidavit that he is claiming paternity. They highly encourage us to file a parternity for every unmarried mother as doing it later requires a DNA test and such. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sassenach Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 My dd born in California is 18, so it was a long time ago. Interesting. My dd, 17, was born in California before dh and I were married and we had zero problems putting him on the BC. Maybe it's a hospital to hospital thing? Or military? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poppy Posted June 21, 2014 Author Share Posted June 21, 2014 I have never once had to produce my marriage certificate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Interesting. My dd, 17, was born in California before dh and I were married and we had zero problems putting him on the BC. Maybe it's a hospital to hospital thing? Or military? I don't know, but I do remember we showed it. It was at a military hospital. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Lulu* Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Quick, the voting on this thread, which Does one star mean: we like the thread and support the parents we like the thread and don't support the parents we hate the thread and support the parents we hate the thread and don't support the parents we are in a cupcake war with the OP we weren't hugged enough as a child we have fat finger syndrome ???????????????????????? Enquiring minds and all that.... :p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy101 Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Wow...that is quite a process, but it makes more sense than the woman just getting to say whatever and then the guy has to have a DNA test to prove he is NOT the father. But then what if the actual father refuses to do all those things? What happens then?It's really wasn't all that big a deal. Less than 5 minutes, if that. Mom has baby, staffer comes in to get paperwork done, mom fills in everything. Father or guy who wants to be father, shows his drivers license, reads a one page sheet that basicly says he is declaring himself the father and understands this is legally binding to him (Blahblahblah consent stuff), check box if he wants a paternity test (mother check box if she permits ___ individual to do a paternity test on her child) sign here to acknowledge staffer went over this with him and he understands it. Then sign here in birth cert as father. The end. Quick and easy really. Way back when my BFF had her baby unwed as a teen, she could have written in any name she wanted and the father wouldn't even have known. She decided to leave it blank specifically bc he was a no good abusive jerk who she hadn't seen in 8 months and sure as heck was not going to subject her dd to his crap for both their lives. With my first few kids, I just wrote dh's name in and that's it. I don't think he even had to sign it. I don't really remember when they started offering paternity tests, the little legal do you know what signing as father might mean info paragraph and requiring someone on staff witness the father signing. I *think* it was over or right around 10 years ago though... ETA: oh wait. Iirc correct my nephew also had to declare his Native American tribe to get the baby added to the rolls or whatever they call it. But I can't be sure. I'd have to ask him. I just remember his grandmother was really ticked about it for that reason. ETA2: We didn't have to show marriage certificates. I would suspect that's because my state has common law marriage anyways. So both of us publicly signing as married is enough for this purpose. There is a box to check on the certificate forms that asks if the two parents are married to each other and we always checked it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joker Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 I don't know, but I do remember we showed it. It was at a military hospital. We had to show our marriage certificate in CA 14 years ago and it was a military hospital as well. We didn't have to show it in a civilian hospital in another state two years later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldberry Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 we weren't hugged enough as a child we have fat finger syndrome I would bet on one of these two..! A cupcake war would just be silly....who would waste perfectly good cupcakes on a war?? :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaConquest Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Another California baby machine here, and we didn't have to show our marriage certificate for my DS1. Now, getting a Consular Report of Birth Abroad for my triple citizen DS2, that was a serious deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Another California baby machine here, and we didn't have to show our marriage certificate for my DS1. Now, getting a Consular Report of Birth Abroad for my triple citizen DS2, that was a serious deal. The process for getting German birth certificates was more difficult than getting the certificate of birth abroad when we did it. But, our kids are only American citizens since we are both American. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaConquest Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 The process for getting German birth certificates was more difficult than getting the certificate of birth abroad when we did it. But, our kids are only American citizens since we are both American. :) It was serious business. They wanted pics of me pregnant, medical records, proof of how long I have resided in the U.S. (i.e. college/law school transcripts, tax returns). And it took forever. The baby was born in August. We didn't have the CRBA until December. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elfknitter.# Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 3 CA births, 2 at home. For my county, no marriage license necessary. Just a photo ID. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 It was serious business. They wanted pics of me pregnant, medical records, proof of how long I have resided in the U.S. (i.e. college/law school transcripts, tax returns). And it took forever. The baby was born in August. We didn't have the CRBA until December. Wow, we definitely didn't need any of that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.