The words ‘mother’ and ‘father’ are to be removed from birth certificates to allow homosexual couples to be named as ‘parent 1’ and ‘parent 2’ of surrogate children, under the new surrogacy law.
For the first time in British history, changes to the law will allow two men or two women to be named as parents on a child’s birth certificate, in order to avoid discriminating against homosexuals. The change means the biological parents will no longer necessarily be officially identified to provide a legal record of a child’s birth.
The change will take effect on 6 April 2010 following the implementation of the final part of the controversial Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008.
The move has been questioned by fertility experts and lawyers, who believe it means birth records will be effectively falsified.
In the case of two women who register as the parents of a child, there will be no record on the birth register of who the biological father is. A mother could nominate another woman to be her child's ‘father’.
The ‘father’ does not need to be genetically related to the baby, nor be in any sort of romantic relationship with the mother.
Ben Summerskill, Chief Executive of Stonewall, a homosexual ‘rights’ lobby group, said:
‘We are delighted that the reality of people’s family lives in being recognised at last, that lesbian and gay couples no longer have to go through the unpleasantness of an adoption procedure.
‘The law means that from next week, two men who have a child by a surrogate mother will be able to apply to a family court for an order making them the legal parents. The court will rule on whether they are fit to bring up the child.’
However, the implementation of the law was met with much criticism.
Baroness Deech, a senior family lawyer and former head of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, warned:
‘It could even result in deception to exclude the natural father where the mother conceived naturally but uses this provision to cut him out of the child’s life.’
Lady Deech said the rule allowing two parents of the same sex to appear on birth certificates gave her ‘unease’. She added:
‘There is an issue of principle here, which is the truth. It puts the demands of the adults ahead of the rights of children to know and benefit from both sides of their genetic makeup.’
When the Act came into effect, Geraldine Smith, Labour MP for Morecambe, said a birth certificate should be a true record of a child’s genetic heritage.
‘I don't think the state should collude with parents to conceal the true genetic identity,’ she added.
David Jones, a professor of bioethics, likened the role of second parent to that of godparent. He added: ‘This sounds like social engineering on the hoof.’
Philippa Taylor, of Christian charity CARE, said:
‘We are going to get to the point where a birth certificate is not going to be a true statement of anyone's biological heritage.’
Former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith said a father played an essential role in the development of a child.
‘The present Government seems not to care a damn about families.
‘Teenage pregnancy is on the increase, abortion is on the increase, family breakdown is at record levels and we have got a growing number of dysfunctional children that are the product of broken homes.
‘The lesson seems to be loud and clear to me that fathers are required.’
Conservative MP Ann Widdecombe said the change would destroy the ‘basic nature’ of a man and a woman bringing up a child together as parents.