Gay Couple Wins Right To Amend Child's Birth Record
- Thread starter Liberalman
- Start date
I sort of meant having their original parents names put back on his certificate and his 'adoptive ones taken off.
As far as genetic health history, it's a non-issue. Genetic screening can be done for quite cheap these days.
That might not be the situation in all cases that will get that same approval over the coming decades. To be quite truthful I lost interest in the general subject when same-sex couples gained the right to adopt and be classified as parents. That doesn't mean I would object to a single person being able to adopt if they could show that they could supply a suitable home, if that makes me 3 faced then so be it.
Petros has no issues with this because it is a non-issue. You can change your sex, your name, where you live but it won't change your numbers.
Nothing, I just think they should have their own children, rather than adopt, and obviously they can't. Then again I see many married couples (man and wife) that get their children taken aware because they are totally unfit to raise kids, like my own step-daughters and I ended up being the single parent to my own step-grandson. That was a blast BTW even with their interference in the same ways that originally got them taken away. ie turning a 16 year old onto crack. Luckily that was a short episode but the mom and dad saw absolutely nothing wrong with it, it was their way of 'bonding' or whatever was running through their addled minds. Maybe that made me a bit jaded and made the child's welfare more important that filling a 'loneliness hole' in some 'adult'.
I stated that they could supply a stable support system rather than not being able to which is what I take your reply to say.
Single parents are numerous, should they not be allowed to raise their own siblings simply because they don't have a partner. In some cases a step-parent is worse for the child than having just one that cares for them. (no ready stats to back that up but some actually cases it is a step-parent that actually causes the child's death)
I never said single parents shouldn't actually... I just said if both come with issues, why is one not okay?
Love and care is the only thing I care about when it comes to child rearing. Whose kid it is/was, how many people will be raising it, who those people will be.... all that's kind of beside the point so long as they can prove they will do a good job.
The child themselves very well might is years to come especially with regards to health issues. I know that when I entered hospital with heart attack at age 41, the medical professionals were more than interested in the health of both of my parents, and their parents, and had any of them had issues with their heart. With revised birth records for adopted individuals, it would make finding out that information virtually impossible. I could care less that the parents are of the same sex, I'm thinking of the child's future, and I just think this is so selfish on their part. God the child themselves will eventually know that the parents who brought them up can't possible be their fatehr and mother, there had to have been a male in the picture somewhere. science hasn't been able to accomplish that, yet.
That's awesome f!ck stick. Maybe you should read the article. Considering it's about two men. So obviously there will be a male in the picture.
You did read all the facts, right? You did notice that the "mother" originally listed on the BC was a surrogate and had contributed 0 genetic material to this child, right?
Ok, this is driving me nuts. The headline just makes me grrrr everytime I go by it.
Amending the birth certificate/birth record has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the sexual orientation of the parents. My own birth certificate lists my surname as that of my step-father who adopted me when I was five. Whether a judge typically issues a ruling or it is normally a rubber stamp process I couldn't say, but either way it happens all the time.
Whether a birth record should include any kind of medical information is an entirely different topic altogether. Perhaps we should be redefining what information is included in a birth record. Maybe we need categories like Parent 1, Parent 2, Surrogate and Donor to more accurately reflect the very different ways in which children are conceived today. This also has nothing whatsoever do with the sexual orientation of the parents.
So this gay couple didn't "win" anything. They were simply afforded the same rights as any other parents would have had. Why did it have to take so frigging long to get there?
Amending the birth certificate/birth record has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the sexual orientation of the parents. My own birth certificate lists my surname as that of my step-father who adopted me when I was five. Whether a judge typically issues a ruling or it is normally a rubber stamp process I couldn't say, but either way it happens all the time.
Whether a birth record should include any kind of medical information is an entirely different topic altogether. Perhaps we should be redefining what information is included in a birth record. Maybe we need categories like Parent 1, Parent 2, Surrogate and Donor to more accurately reflect the very different ways in which children are conceived today. This also has nothing whatsoever do with the sexual orientation of the parents.
So this gay couple didn't "win" anything. They were simply afforded the same rights as any other parents would have had. Why did it have to take so frigging long to get there?