High Court judge issues caution over homosexual parenting arrangements
A High Court judge has warned of the emotional damage to children that can result from complicated parenting arrangements involving homosexual couples deciding to have children through IVF.
The judge made the comments in a ruling which concluded a case between male and female couples over parenting rights.
In July 1999 a lesbian couple placed an advert in the Pink Paper for ‘a gay man or couple who would like to start a family with a lesbian couple.’ A male homosexual couple responded, saying that ‘we would love to be father and stepfather.’
The two couples maintained cordial relations for a number of years until conflict arose in 2008 and they began to argue over the girls, now aged 6 and 10.
A social worker said that the eldest daughter in particular had experienced significant emotional harm through the ordeal, stating that she found herself in “a horrendous tangle of emotion and conflict that exists between these adults. The girl is being made to carry the responsibility for the failure of the adults in this system to overcome the conflicts between them.”
In his judgment, Mr Justice Hedley made reference to a shortage of vocabulary to describe the situation. Venting his frustration, he lamented the “lack of sufficient vocabulary to explain the true nature of the relationships.”
He added: “The four adults in this case regard the price paid by these two children as an acceptable price for the pursuit of their own adult disputes ... The case provides a vivid illustration of just how wrong these arrangements can go.”
In the end he ruled that the female couple should be the “primary parents” and the male couple “secondary parents,” saying “I have tried hard to see whether there are any other concepts than that of mother, father and primary carer, all conventional family concepts.
“The best that I have achieved... is to contemplate the concept of principal and secondary parenting.”
Under this arrangement, the female couple will have most responsibility in raising the children, with the male couple to be consulted on medical issues, education and moving house, as well as being able to see the girls at set times.
The male couple’s lawyer also stated that this case should give pause for thought to those who decide to have children through IVF, commenting: “The case provides a very real warning to couples entering into artificial insemination arrangements.”
Andrea Williams, chief executive of Christian Concern, said:
“The judge’s comments concerning adequate vocabulary highlight the mess that we are in. Children deserve a mother and father and this arrangement, and others like it, clearly deprive them of that.
“The judge is absolutely right that adults’ whims are taking precedent over the rights of children. This is a worrying trend and we must continue to encourage true family and parenting rather than destroy them through redefining them.”
Source
