Posted on 06/20/2014 10:09:04 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Two gay fathers in Texas have been denied legal recognition of their twin sons, born through a surrogate mother, because same-sex marriage is not legal in the state. While the fathers are petitioning to be placed on the birth certificates, conservative group Family Research Council has argued that the case should not serve as a "back-door" for redefining marriage.
"Family Research Council supports the parental rights of anyone who is a biological parent, regardless of their marital or relationship status," Peter Sprigg, senior fellow at FRC, told The Christian Post in an email on Thursday.
"However, we believe that second-parent adoption, or joint adoption by two adults when neither is the biological parent, should be limited to parents who are legally married. In Texas, this would exclude same-sex couples."
Sprigg added: "Cases such as the one in Texas should not be used as a back-door method of redefining marriage, nor of affirming parental arrangements that deliberately deny, and deprive a child of, the benefits of having both a mother and a father."
The parents, Jason Hanna and Joe Riggs, fathered Lucas and Ethan, who were born in April through a surrogate, The Huffington Post reported earlier this week.
While each man is the biological father of one of the children, they have not been placed on the birth certificates, and have not been allowed to co-adopt each other's biological child. Only the surrogate mother is on the certificates, but she is not their biological mother, since embryos were transferred to her.
"As of right now in Texas two men cannot be on the birth certificate," Hanna explained in an interview on SiriusXM Progress.
"So our attorney followed the letter of the law. We petitioned the court. We had DNA testing there [in court] and petitioned the judge to ultimately remove the surrogate mother from the birth certificate, who has no biological ties to the boys. We would like each biological dad to be placed on the birth certificate of our own son, and then ultimately proceed to the second-parent adoption. The entire petition was denied."
The judge's decision has been criticized by pro-gay groups such as the Family Equality Council, with Executive Director Gabriel Blau stating that the judge "was wrong on moral, ethical, and legal grounds."
The gay couple, legally married in Washington, D.C., last July, said they are worried if something were to happen to one of them and adoption was denied to the remaining partner.
"The state could come in and separate these two brothers … We want to reiterate how important it is for a state to recognize each family, whether it's same-sex or opposite-sex, and really to ensure everyone has equal protection from the state," Hanna said.
Riggs added that they were "shocked" when the Texas judge said she could not grant their request under law, since they had heard of other gay couples in Texas that had been successful in their petition.
In February, San Antonio-based federal Judge Orlando Garcia struck down Texas' ban on same-sex marriage, but due to an ongoing appeal process, gay couples are not yet allowed to get married.
I think the “Family Research Council” needs to go back and complete their research as to what exactly constitutes a family, cuz this ain’t it.
They’re not fraternal twins, because fraternal twins still share the same two parents. These are “womb-mates” I guess, but they’re not twins under any ordinary meaning of that term.
California is NOT Texas.
If the eggs were bought from the same seller, the children are half-siblings.
Excellent summary!
It was Florida.
Miami Judge Allows 3 Names on Birth Certificate
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/02/miami-judge-allows-3-names-on-birth-certificate/
They’ll keep trying.
Bill Would Allow Same-Sex Parents on Birth Certificates
Andy Miller and Brian Stephens fell in love 12 years ago while they were training for a marathon on the trails around Lady Bird Lake in downtown Austin. As they began talking about starting a family, they knew of only one same-sex couple who had successfully adopted.
“There weren’t a lot of role models,” Miller said.
Miller and Stephens adopted their son, Clark, days after he was born in 2007. But on Clark’s birth certificate, only Miller’s name appears under “father.” “Mother” remains noticeably blank — and Stephens’ name is nowhere to be found.
Texas law prevents gay parents from both being listed on supplemental birth certificate forms for adoptive children. The forms provide space for only one mother, a woman, and one father, a male. The gender-specific language was added in 1997 as a part of a renewed commitment to conservative values, said the amendment’s author, former state Rep. Will Hartnett, R-Dallas.
Opponents of the provision say it compels same-sex families to present unwieldy paperwork to prove legal parentage for medical care, school enrollment and international travel, and prompts extra scrutiny that can embarrass or confuse children.
http://www.texastribune.org/2013/01/28/bill-allows-same-sex-parents-birth-certificate/
Why aren't the natural mother's and father's names on the birth certificate as mother and father? If it's legal for two men - homosexual "couple" or not - to adopt a child, then the two men's names could appear on a legal document of the adoption, not as mother or father, but as "adoptive guardians."
For example, there could be a situation in which a woman who is a drug addict has a child, and her father, the child's grandfather, wants to adopt the child. However, they also consider it useful for his son, the child's uncle, to be a co-guardian, since the uncle is likely to outlive the grandfather. These two men would be "adoptive guardians" of the child, while "mother and father" would be the biological parents.
I agree. I do know in most states when a child is adopted they are issues a new birth certificate and the adoptive parents names are on it and the original birth certificate is destroyed. I think for the child’s benefit your idea is a good one.
I think they are twins. If they are from the same donor egg and from the same (though different) womb at the same time. I believe if a slutty woman had sex with two guys at ovulation and conceived a child from each horn dog, the two sharing the womb are twins.
So why can’t these guys just live together as single dads?
How are these two guys the “fathers”? How does that word even get used in this context? The MSM all needs to be fired.
I have big doubts about whether this website can be considered “Christian” to tell the truth, possibly wolf in sheeps clothing
Possibly, but not twins.
No, they are not twins. Not unless they had the same genetic father and mother, which they don’t. Gestating in the same hired uterus does not make children “twins.”
Dear Jason and Joe,
All the machinations simply prove that it takes a male and a female to make a baby.
I did not know that. I think that, for the benefit of the child, the natural parents and adoptive parents should be separately specified.
The BC isn’t destroyed - just sealed. This is from NC and I assume most other states have the same procedure.
VIII. AMENDMENT OF BIRTH CERTIFICATE
A. Provision is made within the adoption statute, N.C.G.S.§48-9-107, for changing the name of the child and for the preparation of a new birth certificate in the adoptive name. The original birth certificate is sealed and a new one is issued by the Office of Vital Records in the state where the child was born. This is done upon receipt of the Court’s report that the Decree of Adoption has been issued and that the change of name is authorized. This Report, which is actually an order issued by the Court of Adoptions, is made on Form DSS-1815, Report to Vital Records. The Clerk of Court signs the Report and forwards it to the Division of Social Services at the time the Decree of Adoption is sent.
B. In North Carolina, as in most states, the new birth certificate makes no reference to the adoption, and the names of the adoptive parents are shown as though they were the birth parents of the child. The original certificate is placed under seal which may not be broken except as provided in N.C.G.S.§48-9-105 and 106 for the opening of the adoption record.
C. N.C.G.S.§48-9-108 provides for restoration of the original birth certificate if the decree of adoption is set aside.
http://info.dhhs.state.nc.us/olm/manuals/dss/csm-50/man/CSs1302-08.htm
I think this type of legislative provision is out of date. In a time when being born to an unmarried mother could have a substantial negative impact on the child, it made some sense. However, today, that’s not an issue. It seems to me that the good of the child is best served by specifying the natural parents as the natural parents, and the adoptive guardians as such.
I thought it was interesting that the surrogate was on the BC, given she isn’t biologically involved, and had no interest in the children.
Of course, each parent could have already had their names on the certificate of their child. They REFUSE to do that, because then it would just be an unrelated guy asking to be on the BC, and that would be stupid.
By refusing to put their own names on their own child’s certificates, they can pretend they are being “denied” access to their children.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.