Very interesting/worthwhile read:
"Journey into the bubble"
"Open Letter to Alison"
I have been reading Alison's blog (http://journeyintothebubble.blogspot.com/) and I am both heart sick and awed by what she has shared. Alison if you are reading this, I hope you consider sharing your story with the media or in a way that draws attention to your/our plight.
We live in a world of competing sorrows but rarely is the plight of the 'child' (who are children for a VERY short time) to know/be known/loved/supported by ALL the people they come from and belong to, reported on in a balanced manner as the plight of the reproductive (and personal relationship) angst of 'adults'.
Alison, thank you so much for sharing your deeply personal story and thoughts. I hope by doing this you will find a donor to heal you and the 'donor' (your biological father/half siblings/extended family/ancestry etc.) to complete you.
Friday, August 28, 2009
Very interesting/worthwhile read:
Thursday, August 13, 2009
There is a lot of debate in fertility “circles” about birth certificates and many court cases whereby one or both of commissioning parents seek to have their names put on a birth certificate where otherwise it would have another persons name on it under law.
Rather than address the legal status of each person in relation to the child and their place or lack thereof on a birth certificate I wish to analyse what a birth certificate actually is and what should occur as a result.
A birth certificate is supposed to be a truthful and legal document which describes the progenitors of a child. It is a pedigree that traces our genealogy. It is our heritage. Historically the progenitors of a child were always the raising parents which were traditionally married or in a de-facto relationship. So the people that raised you were also your biological father/mother and appeared on your birth certificate as such. The problem now is that because your biological parents may not be the ones that raise you due to some fertility treatment procedure, the birth certificates can become a fraudulent document when a non-progenitor is placed on it instead.
Just as we use pedigree papers to trace the biological lineage of animals such as dogs, cats, horses etc, we can and do use birth certificates for the same purpose in humans. Historians and genealogists use them to trace a person’s heritage and history. If we replace a progenitor on a birth certificate with a social parent then we create false history and the truth becomes clouded by lies. We are rewriting history with erroneous claims.
It would appear as though the non-biological parent who seeks inclusion on the birth certificate or replacement of the biological parent does so out of fear that the child will then not recognise them as their dad/mum. There is no evidence to suggest that this is the case. There is too much emotion placed on a birth certificate when none should be placed on it at all. It is purely a document describing the genetic history of each person, it has absolutely nothing to do with who raises or loves you. They can be two entirely separate things and should be kept separate when it comes to creating a birth certificate.
Those who are a party to a fertility treatment and subsequent rearing of child but are not the progenitors can still be recognised as the legal parent of the child without having to be on the birth certificate. It is time we recognised the truth and recorded the facts on birth certificates rather than play deceitful games with fraudulent documents. It is up to each country/state to decide if they also wish to include the social/non-biological parent AS WELL on the birth certificate, or to create additional documentation detailing the legal parenthood of each child. What they should not be doing is usurping the truth.
My birth certificate is a lie and not worth the piece of paper it is written on, is yours?