kiwik Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 I haven't read it all but the legal parents if a child have traditionally been 1) the woman who birthed the child and 2) the man who was nominated by the mother as the father - if they were not married the father had to acknowledge the child. For the father biology did not come into it. A man could be legally (not by adoption) the father of a child he knew not to be his biologically or one that he believed to be biologically his and wasn't. If a surrogate carries a child using a donor she is still legally the mother and her husband is legally the father whether he provided the sperm or not and the biological parents must officially adopt and therefore meet the country they are in's criteria for adoption. It may not be fair but the makers of the law never foresaw situations like the one mentioned. Edit. I live in NZ. Both parents have to fill in the form if they aren't married but i am not sure they do if they aren't. When i had ds7 you could just tick a box saying you couldn't or didn't want to name the father but by the time i had ds5 it was a real song and dance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitten18 Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 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 (not being snarky at all), I had a baby in CA (and MO) and I definitely didn't need a marriage license when filing the birth certificate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TravelingChris Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 I had two of our three kids in CA and they weren't in military hospitals since the ones near our bases didn't do deliveries. Anyway, I am pretty sure we didn't show our marriage certificate. In fact, I had to always make sure that they knew we were married since we don't share a last name. My military ID did show that, of course, and that served as the insurance card too so they always had that. The AF hospital in Ohio also didn't require a copy of our marriage certificate either. That was the number two child and the only one born at a military facility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sassenach 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. Which is funny to me, since you would have already presented your marriage certificate for housing, payroll, IDs ect. The military hospital should be the one place that doesn't need to see it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laundrycrisis Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 If a person's religious beliefs don't mesh with IVF or surrogacy, they can choose not to use those options. But it wouldn't be right to attempt to impose this and remove the freedom of choice for everyone, based on the religious beliefs of one group. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Which is funny to me, since you would have already presented your marriage certificate for housing, payroll, IDs ect. The military hospital should be the one place that doesn't need to see it. One would think! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bethben Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 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. Yes- this. I saw an adoption counselor give a speech on what happens to a baby when they are separated from the woman who gave them birth. He used a piece of paper with M on one side and B on the other. When B is born, the paper is folded because the baby still sees himself as an extension of the M who gave him birth. Gradually, through the baby years, the paper unfolds and through childhood, the paper rips as the child becomes independent of mom and knows they are a separate person. With adoption/ surrogacy, the paper is abruptly opened and ripped all at the same time. A traumatic event in the child's life. So, even though the baby may be in a completely loving home, their beginnings were a trauma in their life that they at some point will have to deal with. Beth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
songsparrow Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 The articles written about this case have been less than crystal clear. It appears that the judge rejected the fathers' petition without commenting on the merits at all, and certainly without stating anything homophobic from the bench. The article I read stated that the men's attorney petitioned to have them "adopt" their children from the surrogate. The articles do not discuss why their attorney opted to do that, when it appears that they could have simply filed paperwork to be added to the birth certificates without any need to go to court at all. Once their names were added to the birth certificates, they then could have petitioned the court to remove the surrogate mother's name. And, six months later, they could have petitioned to have the other father adopt each child. So, it's possible that the judge was correct and this was not the proper way for their attorney to proceed. In saying that, I'm not at all discounting actual homophobia or the precarious legal position that homosexual couples are often placed in when they wish to be a married couple or start a family. It's just not at all clear to me that that is what is actually happening in this case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unsinkable Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 The articles written about this case have been less than crystal clear. It appears that the judge rejected the fathers' petition without commenting on the merits at all, and certainly without stating anything homophobic from the bench. The article I read stated that the men's attorney petitioned to have them "adopt" their children from the surrogate. The articles do not discuss why their attorney opted to do that, when it appears that they could have simply filed paperwork to be added to the birth certificates without any need to go to court at all. Once their names were added to the birth certificates, they then could have petitioned the court to remove the surrogate mother's name. And, six months later, they could have petitioned to have the other father adopt each child. So, it's possible that the judge was correct and this was not the proper way for their attorney to proceed. In saying that, I'm not at all discounting actual homophobia or the precarious legal position that homosexual couples are often placed in when they wish to be a married couple or start a family. It's just not at all clear to me that that is what is actually happening in this case. This seems like a relevant point in the article, and you mentioned it, too, songsparrow: "In Texas, a second parent adoption can’t be done for six months." So, is this the main issue? The waiting period? More from the article: "Tarrant County attorney Lauren Duffer specializes in reproductive technology law and recommends refiling elsewhere to get the situation resolved as fast as possible. “I don’t file any of my same-sex adoptions in Tarrant County,†she said. She said Dallas is fine. Couples from around the state have filed in San Antonio for years. Travis is good. She’s even had some good results in Denton. “Houston is making strides,†she said. “But absolutely never in Tarrant.†She repeated one last bit of advise she’d give them if they were her clients. “Refile elsewhere,†she said. “Definitely do not refile in there.†Duffer said venue is a choice in Texas and in this case, the paperwork should be filed as three separate motions. First file to end the surrogate’s parental rights and have her name removed from the birth certificates. The next step, with paternity determined by DNA tests, is to have each biological dad’s name placed on the birth certificate of his own son. Duffer said those two things can be done at the same hearing as well as having each dad named as the other child’s joint managing conservator. In Texas, a second parent adoption can’t be done for six months. Since it’s an adoption, a home study needs to be done during that period and then should be filed in Dallas or San Antonio." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
songsparrow Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 My understanding of the case, based on cursory research about Texas law and the limited facts that have been stated in articles about the case, is that the same-sex / second parent adoption issue was not the issue raised at this juncture of the case. The attorney framed the current petition as each biological dad seeking to "adopt" his biological child from the surrogate, in order to add his name to the birth certificate and remove her name. But according to the Texas website, there was no need to proceed in this fashion - to have his name added to the birth certificate, each bio dad merely had to fill out some paperwork and file it with an affidavit of paternity, and did not need to go to court at all. After they did that, they could petition the court to remove the surrogate mother's name from the birth certificate. And finally, six months from now, they could petition for the second parent adoptions. It's not clear whether their attorney ever attempted to file the paperwork in this way or not, whether their paperwork was denied, etc. But it could be the case that their attorney simply proceeded in the wrong fashion (by framing the issue as the bio dad "adopting" from the surrogate) and so their petition was correctly rejected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unsinkable Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Thanks, songsparrow! Are you a lawyer, perchance? You explained that very well! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
songsparrow Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Thanks! I am a retired lawyer. :001_smile: And, for the record, I never practiced in Texas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unsinkable Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Thanks! I am a retired lawyer. :001_smile: And, for the record, I never practiced in Texas. Cool! Thank YOU! I hope the men get everything straightened out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucyStoner Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 I'm pretty sure that's all we had to do here, too (in Washington state).Same. We filled in a form and the hospital submitted it to the county. They took our word for everything. No marriage certificate was asked for. In King County, they will list the birth certificate as parent one and parent two for a transgendered parent. They did for my brother (female to male transman) and his husband (biologically male). They did this automatically for my older niece and when they did mother/father for my younger niece, my brother just called the clerk and they reissued it. I assume they can do the same for same sex adoptive couples when they reissue the certificate. 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.