[AnnieK]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

But then what about the mothers who register their babies with no name for the father given?

People are insisting accuracy (although I don't see what's inaccurate about labelling Betty and Len "Parents" rather than "Mother and Father") but there doesn't seem to be a lot of insistency on gathering all of the relevant and accurate information on them anyway. The mother can literally take any boyfriend and claim he is the father.

Unmarried couples both have to be present when you register the birth. If you are unmarried and just mother goes, to register they cannot include the fathers name. Married couples, either parent can register the birth and include both names.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

Unmarried couples both have to be present when you register the birth. If you are unmarried and just mother goes, to register they cannot include the fathers name. Married couples, either parent can register the birth and include both names.

Yes, I know. What I'm saying is. The unmarried mother either goes with the father, on her own where no father is registered, or takes her boyfriend (either knowingly or unknowingly ) to register him as the father.

My point is, it's not very accurate in and of itself.

[parmnion]

I wish I could remember what I was on my sons certificate.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by parmnion

I wish I could remember what I was on my sons certificate.

The father hopefully?

[parmnion]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

The father hopefully?

I was definatly that...the occupation.....I'm sure I jazzed it up a bit through shame.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

But then what about the mothers who register their babies with no name for the father given?

People are insisting accuracy (although I don't see what's inaccurate about labelling Betty and Len "Parents" rather than "Mother and Father") but there doesn't seem to be a lot of insistency on gathering all of the relevant and accurate information on them anyway. The mother can literally take any boyfriend and claim he is the father.

So if it doesn't matter so much why does it matter enough to change it?

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Yes, I know. What I'm saying is. The unmarried mother either goes with the father, on her own where no father is registered, or takes her boyfriend (either knowingly or unknowingly ) to register him as the father.

My point is, it's not very accurate in and of itself.

Parents, could be anything though step parents, God parents, guardians

this is a BIRTH certificate, so the person who gave birth should be named, Parent 1 or Parent 6 doesn't really tell you anything

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Parents, could be anything though step parents, God parents, guardians



this is a BIRTH certificate, so the person who gave birth should be named, Parent 1 or Parent 6 doesn't really tell you anything

It does if the birth-giver is always listed as Parent 1. Simple solutions to simple problems Cherie

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Parents, could be anything though step parents, God parents, guardians

this is a BIRTH certificate, so the person who gave birth should be named, Parent 1 or Parent 6 doesn't really tell you anything

Well, if the two names on a certificate are Wendy and Keith it doesn't take three degrees and a 6 month internship to work out who gave birth.

The point I was making was, IMO, for them to be as accurate as possible they should only have the names of the two people who made the baby. In the case of a single mother/absent or unknown father, have only the mother.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

So if it doesn't matter so much why does it matter enough to change it?

I've no idea. I don't necessarily agree with the person from the article's thinking.

But, if we're against changing these documents because they need to "retain historical accurate information" then they need a major overhaul already.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Well, if the two names on a certificate are Wendy and Keith it doesn't take three degrees and a 6 month internship to work out who gave birth.

The point I was making was, IMO, for them to be as accurate as possible they should only have the names of the two people who made the baby. In the case of a single mother/absent or unknown father, have only the mother.

Well it would if this case goes through as it will be a male name on the birth cert?

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

It does if the birth-giver is always listed as Parent 1. Simple solutions to simple problems Cherie

What if Parent 2 wants to be listed as Parent 1, imagine being at the school gates and the Head comes out and asks for Emilys Parent 1 to come into the office, just ridiculous and robotic, sorry

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Cherie

What if Parent 2 wants to be listed as Parent 1, imagine being at the school gates and the Head comes out and asks for Emilys Parent 1 to come into the office, just ridiculous and robotic, sorry

Like I said, the person who gave birth would be automatically listed as Parent 1.

School gates? What do school gates have to do with birth certificates? Im not saying we should do away with the terms altogether I'm literally ONLY talking about birth certificates .

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Well it would if this case goes through as it will be a male name on the birth cert?

Maybe a gender field to be added to denote that the birth parent is trans?

[parmnion]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Maybe a gender field to be added to denote that the birth parent is trans?

Or everyone could just like not give a ****...I'm not having my taxes paid to pandering.

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by parmnion

Or everyone could just like not give a ****...I'm not having my taxes paid to pandering.

I don't see how it would cost anything... it's all filed electronically these days. It would literally take two seconds to add a checkbox.

I strongly suspect people are just "uncomfortable with the idea".

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Maybe a gender field to be added to denote that the birth parent is trans?

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I don't see how it would cost anything... it's all filed electronically these days. It would literally take two seconds to add a checkbox.

I strongly suspect people are just "uncomfortable with the idea".

The father was not trans when he gave birth

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Cherie

The father was not trans when he gave birth

He just didn't register the birth for other reasons? As far as I understand the story, it's not that he later wants to go back and alter a birth certificate, he was told it couldn't be issued in the first place, so when he went to register (I assume, relatively soon after the birth) he was told that it wasn't allowed. It seems unlikely that he wasn't trans at the time of the birth, but was trans a week or two later . Unless you don't mean transgendered and are referring specifically to surgical alterations, which isn't really what this is about.

[Becs]

I wish people would think more about their children than themselves.

[Cherie]

I suppose its possible half way through the pain of labour she decided to self identify as a man

[parmnion]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I don't see how it would cost anything... it's all filed electronically these days. It would literally take two seconds to add a checkbox.

I strongly suspect people are just "uncomfortable with the idea".

It would be the torys in charge of changing it.

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by parmnion

It would be the torys in charge of changing it.

That's true, it would end up costing billions.

[parmnion]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

That's true, it would end up costing billions.

Well we can't be having that, can we?

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Cherie

The father was not trans when he gave birth

It doesn't work like that.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Birth certs say the status at birth Sperm and egg donors. Nowt else.no vanity