Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Should not be that way. Birth certificates should document a birth. Adoption certificates should be issued for adoptions.
Can't argue with that. Nonetheless, it is not at all the case that a birth certificate is a factual statement regarding one's biological parents. Therefore, OP's entire argument is moot.
I was born in Texas in May, 1960 and adopted in June, 1960.....
Oddly enough, my birth certificate lists my adoptive parents as my parents.... no stars or asterisks or anything of the sort to denote that it is a "special" or amended birth certificate.....
a child's parents are just that, no matter how the family came to be......
It is science. It is biology. A "BIRTH" certificate shows that a female gave birth to you from her fertilized eggs and from a male's sperm. No other way around it. (MODS can move this to parenting if more appropriate)
So, am I missing something when a same-sex married couple wants to sue the state because they won't put both spouses on the birth certificate? The keyword they use for their argument is "spouses" while anyone else in the science or medical field would say the biological father and mother.
I don't think it is has anything to do with being "politically correct". It is common sense. No matter if the father died before the baby's birth, raped the woman, or simply skipped town. And vice versa for the woman. You could have a couple, man and woman who broke up yet she went on to have the baby, and the nurse/doctor would still include the biological parent on the certificate, not somebody else. Even if she fell in love with another female or went to fertility clinic and had her eggs inseminated yet her female partner wants to now be the mother (or father) too???? NEWSFLASH: Birth just doesn't work that way for two men or two females.
Has the medical community changed the birth certificate to put the child's current parents at the time of their inception. Have they modified it to list "non-biological parent" to accommodate same-sex couples or are they still doing the logical thing? Gay Couples Sue Florida Over Names on Birth Certificates - ABC News
I know, I know. Here come all the bigot remarks and labeling from people whose opinion must be agreed upon by you and and others or you are just racist and spew hate. Sorry, if I still believe in nature and biological parents on a birth certificate.
If the SS couple wants to be the parents who raise the child, let them be that, but one of them will never be the kids biological parent. Don't lie to the kid. There needs to be truth from the get go, instead of perpetrating a lie on a very important document. Even adopting parents don't pull that lie with birth certificates. As you know, som birth certificates simply put unknown and that is what these couples should accept. It is NOT inequality or unfair. It is just. It is correct and the right thing to do for a "birth certificate" IMO. Maybe California has allowed it thsi on BCs as they will let anything be fair game, even having taxpayers pay for an inmate change his sex. I'll take that slow golf clap now.
When a child is adopted they have new parents and a new family. OK? They also have new siblings.
They take the parent's last name. They have grandparents, uncles, aunts and cousins.
New ones.
Have you heard of filing income taxes? Filling out the FASFA for college? Travel with your parents? Registration in school? Birth certificates are needed for all of these.
Can you imagine the confusion?
Adoption, like divorce ends a familial tie legally. In the case, a new legal family is forged.
My children are REAL brother and SISTER. They share the same parents and the same last name.
My daughter does not want the name of a strange man and woman on her BC.
They most certainly do. Also, same-sex couples are adoptive parents.
Some same sex couples are adoptive parents. Some are natural parents, some use surrogacy, fertility treatments, and some adopt a child related to neither of them or only one of them. You know, just like heterosexual couples.
I was born in Texas in May, 1960 and adopted in June, 1960.....
Oddly enough, my birth certificate lists my adoptive parents as my parents.... no stars or asterisks or anything of the sort to denote that it is a "special" or amended birth certificate.....
a child's parents are just that, no matter how the family came to be......
Isn't your birth certificate a revised birth certificate? Wasn't there a previous birth certificate in place until your parents adopted? The old birth certificate would possibly have been sealed at the time of adoption.
At the hospital when my kids were born, my husband and I both had to sign off on the birth certificate. It also came with paperwork for genetic testing if the birth father was in doubt. I would think think that a surrogate pregnancy with two fathers or two moms using donor sperm would have to go through some sort of transitional paperwork showing biological parents and then possibly changing to having the biological parent and the non-biological parent.
Do we have a term yet to describe the non-biological parent in a gay marriage? The fight for custody is already starting to be an issue in gay divorces.
There is no term to describe the non biological parent in a gay marriage any more than there is a different term used by children who came into their families through adoption as opposed to to the birth canal.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.