Sydney dads become first gay ‘parents’
Surrogacy advocates have welcomed the news that two Sydney men have become the first same-sex couple in New South Wales to be the legally recognised parents of a child conceived through surrogacy.
The Daily Telegraph reported a Supreme Court judge last month ruled it would be “in the best interests” of the child, who was born in 2010, for the couple to be declared the parents.
Supreme Court Justice Paul Brereton said he was “satisfied” the two men and the surrogate mother had entered into an altruistic agreement and the woman had not been paid.
When handing down the judgement, Brereton said they were the first same-sex couple he was aware of to apply for guardianship under the Surrogacy Act.
“I am satisfied that, having regard to the surrogacy arrangement, and the care arrangements for the child since birth, the making of the parentage order would be in the best interests of the child,” Brereton told the court.
The child’s birth mother will no longer be listed on the birth certificate after she agreed to have her name removed.
The NSW Surrogacy Act, which came into effect last year, prohibits any commercial surrogacy arrangements made locally or internationally with penalties of two years jail or a $110,000 fine.
Gay Dads Australia spokesman Rodney Chiang-Cruise told the Star Observer it was wonderful news and congratulated the unnamed couple.
He said the ruling was more than just having two names on the birth certificate.
“It’s a recognition in law in NSW, and in Australia, that they are the legal parents of the child, they’re not considered donors,” he said.
Chiang-Cruise said there were several similar cases underway in Australia.
“They are the first to be granted a parentage order in NSW but they won’t be the last either,” he said.
Surrogacy Australia president Sam Everingham said it was an important ruling and showed the new laws were working.
“It’s showing the social change out there and the acceptance that gay families can be just as good,” he said.
But Everingham said there were still flaws in the system.
“The trouble is most gay couples aren’t lucky enough to find a surrogate in Australia, so they can’t access these kind of benefits,” he said.
“Most couples who go down this route, who are gay guys, end up going overseas because they can’t find someone at home.”
You May Also Like
No M Bris it is not ok to have children but still go out to Saunas/slut about at MG etc etc It’s this sort of messag that kids do not need, we need to instil in them that relationships should be between two people only, giving kids such an “alternative” message on relationships will just bring up generations of people who are morally and emotionally aloof, rules that are brought up from society/religion actually keep us in bay and allow us to live for each other and NOT for ourselves – This is why I am against gay parents and gay marriage (I am gay an in late 20s). People just don’t think about the social consequences when you mix gay mentality (from what comes from the majority of gays ie sleeping around etc)
with playing house!
Justice Brereton is incorrect in reaching his decision and consequently LAW is incorrect in the way it has been applied.
Surely the original intention of the Birth Certificate in LAW, was to state the names of the individuals from which the offspring were derived. Thus the form was called birth certificate.
Any changes after this would call for changes to be completed. The birth certificate could have addendum.
Surely offspring are entitled to know who were their original parents from a birth certificate rather then inquiring from FOI or Centrelink.
In making his judgement Justice Paul Brereton has failed to grasp this concept and has opened up the possibility of future legal cases.
Surely Justice Brereton has more regard for the LAW then to disregard the LAWs intentions and simply apply his own intentions. Perhaps not.
The birth certificate should include the biological mother’s details as well…ar at least have it available for release with the agreement of the surrogate mother.
M Bris….
what pills are you on mate coz hell… they’re top shelf!
your comment is disjointed, unclear at best and difficult to follow.
i suggest lowering the dose (or increasing it)
Sorry guys, but why the scare quotes around “parents” in the headline? They’re the legal parents, there’s nothing fictional about that. If they were a straight couple, there would be no controversy in calling them parents.
This is great so long as people have a child for the right reasons and please don’t think all gay parents are monogamous, the one’s I know put their children first rightly but you still see them at the saunas. If the mother is fine, go for it, but don’t use this as some sort of mechanism for waving at the Festival of Light look how decent we are. And kids cost money and grow up and get into trouble. You have to be ready to let go of them one day and let them live their own life. Part of that is you will have sex with partners other than the one you are with, not all, but it will happen. I hope this does not lead into some moral imperative that we all become pure as snow and stop slutting and dancing in the Mardi Gras. You child is important, but you need to live your life as well, and if that means you raise a child but still go to the saunas, that’s ok because again not all, but we are human first and that is going to happen, so don’t use this as an excuse to make gay men be seen as decent because frankly we are, child or not.