It’s frustrating to see two-dimensional coverage of an issue that is far more complicated and demands a lot more thought than skewed oversimplification.
Some sweeping generalisations and conclusions have been drawn lately about same-sex parenting, following Senator Penny Wong’s baby news and, unrelated, a recent NSW court decision which saw the name of a sperm donor removed from a child’s birth certificate to retrospectively recognise a non-biological female co-parent.
The invective has been sadly predictable. Those conniving gays, trying to change the world to suit themselves, again.
What NSW District Court Judge Stephen Walmsley rightly pointed out following his judgement is that allowing for three parents, or two parents and a donor (however you split the bill), to be included on a birth certificate is a notion worth considering.
The thought was echoed in an opinion piece by NSW Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby policy advisor Senthorun Raj in The Sydney Morning Herald.
“True injustice lies in the limited mechanisms that are in place to fully document and reflect the diverse set of parenting relationships involved in the upbringing of a child,” he said.There’s no denying battling such cases out in court will always be difficult for those involved, and fraught with legal complications for all concerned.
But instead of demonising rainbow families en masse, we need to look at workable legal solutions.
The NSW court case makes clear how inflexible laws can be, the devastating consequences, and how rainbow families present a challenge to courts.
One of the grenades lobbed by some conservative commentators is that all we queers are living in La La Land, trying to deny the basic facts of biology.
I can’t speak for those in the case above, but for the rainbow families I’ve dealt with in my time reporting on LGBTI issues, the reality is quite the reverse.
Those who need a reality check are commentators who continue to deny rainbow families exist and fail to grasp the legal implications of diverse families.
Ideally birth certificates should be able to reflect a child’s parentage and biological heritage. It will be a difficult slog to get there, but this discussion needs to take place, and all other legal options explored.
It’s also important to point out that not all same-sex parented families end up in legal stoushes.
While the NSW case covers some of the pitfalls of non-traditional family structures, so there are many rainbow families quietly going about their daily business, running late for the school drop-off, changing dirty nappies and learning times tables.
Whether conservative commentators like it or not, the number of rainbow families is only going to increase.
Instead of hysterics, we need to come to legal arrangements that truly reflect these families and offer all parties protection in law.
with all the permutations now available this will remain a legal mine field for years. birth mother, biological mother, egg donor, sperm donor, biological father, cuckolded legal father of child but unknowingly not biological father,adopted parents, foster parents, grandparents – maternal, grandparent – paternal, etc…. Perhaps we need a Birth Novelette to list everyone with an interest in the child.