- Law professor Alain Roy, of the Université de Montréal who says there should be public debate on the long-term effects of listing two mothers on a birth certificate rather than the mother and the father.

In the view of Mona Greenbaum, head of the Lesbian Mothers Association of Quebec, Prof Roy "is putting too much emphasis on someone who, for most of us, plays no role in our lives. He is not thinking of the kids here but the donor." Greenbaum used a sperm bank to have two children with her partner.

Here is the link if you can get in. It's by subscription only. It doesn't contain as much detail as is in my post.

quote:

---

"A birth certificate is to a person what a constitution is to a country. "

---

That is hyperbole that fairly drips with a sort of creeping biological determinism. Either that, or it betrays a lack of understanding of what a constitution is.

One's genetic 'source-material' is but a part of one's self, and one's birth certificate only hints at genetics.

From Quebec govt website:

quote:

---

If a child is born, as a result of assisted procreation, to an opposite-sex couple, whether they are married or joined in a civil or de facto union, a bond of filiation is established with each of the spouses. If the couple is married or living in a civil union, there is a presumption of paternity. This means that the spouse of the mother is presumed to be the father of the child and one of the parents may declare the filiation to the registrar of civil status on behalf of both parents.

If the child is born to a couple consisting of two women1, whether they are joined in a civil or a de facto union, a bond of filiation is established with each of the spouses. They are both designated as the mothers of the child. If the couple is joined in a civil union, the spouse of the woman who gives birth to the child is presumed to be the other parent and one of the two spouses may declare the filiation to the registrar of civil status on the other's behalf. This filiation confers the same rights and obligations as filiation by blood. The rights attributed by law specifically to the father are attributed to the woman in the couple who did not give birth to the child.

Adoption

When a couple that is married or joined in a civil or de facto union adopts a child, a bond of filiation is established with both spouses. The registrar of civil status will alter the details on the act of birth after receiving the adoption judgement.

When the parents of the adopted child are of the same sex, they are both designated as the fathers or the mothers of the child, as the case may be, in the register of civil status. If the law attributes different rights and obligations to the father and the mother, the parent with the biological link to the child will exercise the rights of the father, in the case of a couple formed by men, and the rights of the mother, in the case of a couple formed of women. The adopting parent enjoys the rights and obligations attributed by law to the other parent. When neither of the parents has a biological link with the child, the adoption judgement will determine the rights and obligations of each parent.

---

quote:

---

Why is this an issue now? The law was changed three years ago.

---

This looks like it was drafted before the courts ruled SSM legal in Quebec. We are talking in the current case about two legally married women, not two joined in a civil union.

[ 02 June 2005: Message edited by: donvonbra ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by donvonbra:
In the view of Mona Greenbaum, head of the Lesbian Mothers Association of Quebec, Prof Roy "is putting too much emphasis on someone who, for most of us, plays no role in our lives.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by donvonbra:
Of the 600 families in Greenbaum's association, there is only one in which the father is involved in the child's life.

---

Why are you only concerned about this now? Children are born every day to opposite-sex couples who used a sperm donor, and have been for years, and they list the non-biological father on the birth certificate.

Edited to say: Actually, I just took a peek at some of your past posts, and it looks like you're not just posting this to troll the feminists. So I take back that rather acerbic remark I made at the end of this post.

[ 02 June 2005: Message edited by: Michelle ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:

Edited to say: Actually, I just took a peek at some of your past posts, and it looks like you're not just posting this to troll the feminists. So I take back that rather acerbic remark I made at the end of this post.

[ 02 June 2005: Message edited by: Michelle ]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gir Draxon:

She lost me right there. There are many good reasons why the two mothers should be listed. But it seems her motivation is misandry.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RealityBites:

Simple statement of fact. These are NOT fathers. They are sperm donors and never intended or expected to be anything more.

---

If she meant sperm donors, then absolutely I agree.

quote:

---

Originally posted by donvonbra:
but I did see the fight to get the two legally married mothers' names on the birth certificate as a legitimate feminist issue.

---

Yes, absolutely, I agree with you there. If standard practice for opposite-sex couples is to list the non-biological father's name on the birth certificate in cases of sperm donation, then I can't see how anyone can object to the same thing in a same-sex couple.

Unless, of course, they're willing to go to all the opposite-sex couples in the country who have used sperm (or egg!) donation and tell them, "Why are you keeping your child's biological father/mother out of your child's life??" Which I don't think is going to happen.

As for Gir's comment:

quote:

---

She lost me right there. There are many good reasons why the two mothers should be listed. But it seems her motivation is misandry.

---

What total and complete bullshit. You wouldn't consider it "misandry" or "misogyny" if an opposite-sex couple claimed that an egg or sperm donor plays no role in their lives. Keep your prejudice and lesbian stereotypes to yourself.

The whole thread is about sperm donors, not "biological fathers". In this case, they're the same thing.

[ 02 June 2005: Message edited by: Michelle ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:

Yes, absolutely, I agree with you there. If standard practice for opposite-sex couples is to list the non-biological father's name on the birth certificate in cases of sperm donation, then I can't see how anyone can object to the same thing in a same-sex couple.

---

Birth certificates, as far as I understand, indicated social, not biological, parenthood. The mother's husband is always assumed to be the father of her child, unless she indicates differently. And adopted people's birth certificates are changed to show the adoptive parents, not the birth parents. Clearly society has valued the social aspect of parenting over the genetic aspect, so there should be no reason not to continue doing that where same-sex parents are concerned. In fact, a gay man in Toronto recently registered his daughter's birth with no mother's name on the birth certificate. The child was born of a surrogate mother, using an anonymous egg donor and the father's sperm.

quote:

---

That being said, if the birth certificate does reflect the social parents, I strongly believe that the person born of donated sperm/egg, or the adoptee, should have the right to the identifying information of their genetic parents.

---

I qualify "right to privacy" because, in Ontario at least, there has never been any contract or guarantee to relinquishing parents that their identity would be protected. Indeed, the opposite is true: surrendering birth mothers (it is overwhelmingly mothers to which this discussion relates, as in the past the primary reason for placing a child for adoption was the absence of the father) were told that they were forbidden from ever knowing the new identity of their child, even though there was no legislation to support that.

It may be different (though I suspect it is not) for donated genetic materials. Current legislation does not allow for the identification of the donor but I would be very surprised if there were enforceable contracts guaranteeing that anonymity ad infinitum. I fully expect the legislation surrounding anonymous sperm/egg donation to change, a la adoption legislation, as the individuals born of these procedures reach adulthood.

The BC Vital Statistics Agency says:

quote:

---

The option of filing a disclosure veto is available to birth parents and adopted people involved in adoptions that were completed before the new Act took effect in 1996. A disclosure veto may be filed with the Vital Statistics Agency by adopted people when they reach 18 years of age or by birth parents when the adopted people have reached 18 years of age.

---

Apparently at least some states are willing to make this change on request, but three states: Ohio, Idaho and Tennessee refuse to do so.

Link 1: Maryland Billl Proposes New Birth Certificates for Transsexuals

quote:

---

Annapolis, Maryland - Hearings were held yesterday in the Maryland House of Delegates for a bill that would permit post-operative transsexual men and women to obtain new, unadulterated birth certificates after their sex reassignment surgeries. It's Time, Maryland! a state chapter of the national Transgender political organization It's Time, America! was the lead group behind this bill. Recognition of change of sex has long been permitted in Maryland, but the state's methodology for doing so has raised some serious concerns for transsexuals born in the Free State.

House Bill 1304, sponsored by Delegate Sharon Grosfeld (D, Kensington and Silver Spring) would modify sections of the state code of Maryland to require the state's Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DHMH) to issue new, unadulterated birth certificates to post-operative transsexuals. Under existing law, when such requests are received by the DHMH's Bureau of Vital Statistics, it is their policy to either "white" out or scratch out the original name and sex, adding the new name and correct sex beside them on the proof copy of the birth certificate.

---

Link 2: TG Crossroads launches Ohio Birth Certificate Project

quote:

---

Northfield Center, OH] - Ohio is one of three states that currently refuse to change the sex designation on its birth certificates. (Idaho and Tennessee are the other two.) Ohio attorney Randi Barnabee, herself a transsexual, has developed a new project designed to challenge this state policy.

The result is the Ohio Birth Certificate Project. This project will involved lawsuits filed by transsexuals born in Ohio who are seeking to have the sex designations on their birth certificates changed. Barnabee would like to get as many people as possible involved in as many of Ohio's 88 county courts as possible. The ideal would be at least one applicant in each county.

In order to participate, an individual must:
1. Have been born in Ohio;
2. Have undergone a legal name change;
3. Be post-op M2F or F2M (post-top-surgery required only)
4. Want to correct your birth record.

---

Anyone know what happens in these cases in Canada?

[ 02 June 2005: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

quote:

---

The promise of confidentiality to surrendering mothers has been used in numerous jurisdictions as the reason personal adoption records and information are withheld (except through intermediaries) from those they affect the most: natural mothers and their children surrendered for adoption. The original intent may have been to keep the personal records of natural parents, the person adopted, and adoptive parents private from those whose interests they did not serve. However, misinterpretation over time has been used against the very people it should serve and support. The information may be better kept confidential to public viewing, but it is not better kept from the mother and her child, to both of whom that information is vital.

Our survey of membership, Canada-wide, has not produced one mother who was promised confidentiality. Mothers who have asked for the documents they signed at the time of surrender say they do not have any reference to confidentiality.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by amomc:
oh yeah i forgot to mention that my sister was 12 at the time. also, my son was born in a different state (tx). i'm sure that will make things harder, but please, someone tell me if this is possible to do.

---

i looked into the exact same thing for myself here in canada - more so out of curiosity to see if it was possible, than a strong desire to get rid of a name on my birth certificate. i am content with just changing my name. so, anyway, i was told that it was not possible to strike a name off the original certificate. changes are allowed, of course, but not "deleting history" - they called it. although, i wonder if i might have had a chance had my birth certificate been issued in canada. and if i did have a chance, i suspect that like tape said, an appearance before a judge would have probably been necessary.

quote:

---

Originally posted by amomc:
ok, i will. but...what do you mean by ''changes''? i'm married now. when my husband adopts my son, could his name REPLACE the other name?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by andrean:
adopted people's birth certificates are changed to show the adoptive parents, not the birth parents. Clearly society has valued the social aspect of parenting over the genetic aspect . . .

---

EXCEPT for one purpose (at least in Ontario), very often overlooked: consanguinity, incest and the prohibited degrees of marriage:

quote:

---

as of the date of the making of an adoption order,
the adopted child becomes the child of the adoptive parent . .; and
the adopted child ceases to be the child of the person who was his or her parent before the adoption order was made . .

as if the adopted child had been born to the adoptive parent.

3. The relationship to one another of all persons, including the adopted child, the adoptive parent, the kindred of the adoptive parent, the parent before the adoption order was made and the kindred of that former parent shall for all purposes be determined in accordance with subsection 2.

But . . Subsections 2 and 3 do not apply for the purposes of the laws relating to incest and the prohibited degrees of marriage to remove a person from a relationship that would have existed but for those subsections.

---

So you are still not allowed to marry your half-brother or have sex with him, even though you have no knowledge he is your half-brother.

A very good reason for someone to go to court and say "I want my adoption records unsealed so that I can be sure of my parentage before I get married."

quote:

---

Originally posted by kurichina:
I recall one of the pieces of evidence was a "long-form" birth certificate, that's held provincially. It did have parents listed I think . .

---

[ 22 June 2005: Message edited by: Wilf Day ]