Gaydar radio talks about gay and lesbian parenting options

Gaydar Radio interviewed Sarah Wood-Health from Natalie Gamble Associates on Saturday morning about same sex parenting and the options and pitfalls for gay and lesbian parents starting a family. Talking to Neil and Debbie on the Saturday morning breakfast show (as Britain’s answer to Ally McBeal!), Sarah explained how surrogacy works for gay fathers, and the differences between a surrogacy arrangement in the UK or abroad. Careful planning is the best way of avoiding legal problems, especially for gay dads planning international surrogacy, given the immigration issues and the fact that UK law won’t recognise a foreign birth certificate naming you both as the parents. Sarah was also asked about the options for lesbian couples, discussing the pros and cons of using a known or unknown sperm donor, and the need to set things up in the right way. Although the law has become much more gay-friendly in the last few years, so much is still so untested, including what happens where relationships break down and who has rights and parental status when gay or lesbian parents break up or get divorced. The good news is that there are so many options available now for same sex couples and single gay and lesbian parents – adoption and co-parenting are also on the list. While the law still has a little way to go, it is evolving to try and keep up and it is now much easier for same sex couples or singles to find a way to start a family. It’s just a question of knowing your options and making an informed decision so you make the right choice for you. With good advice it needn’t be complicated. Article: 28th May 2012 by Natalie Gamble Associates

Birth mother vs non-birth mother - lesbian family breakdowns

The news has recently highlighted a number of high profile cases involving disputes within lesbian families and alternative family structures. Primarily these concern fathers or known donors seeking more of a relationship with their child than they originally wished for. However, another interesting and sadly increasing area we are witnessing is the breakdown of relationships in two-mother lesbian parent families. As with any relationship breakdown, issues to be dealt with include division of the finances, any civil partnership dissolution and with whom any children will live (as well as contact with the non-resident parent). But these types of divorce cases have a more complex dynamic, with difficult legal and social questions arising from the mismatched biological (and often legal) status of the two female parents. To date there has been very little judicial guidance as to how much weight the family court will place on the importance of being a birth mother in divorce proceedings, and whether in such cases the birth history and biological link should be considered more important than the relationship between the non-birth mother and the child. Of course every case is unique, but the two main cases so far where the court has considered and explored these issues in principle make for very interesting reading. The first case was that of Re G [2006] UKHL 43 which involved a difficult dispute about where the children conceived by a lesbian couple through artificial insemination should live following their separation. The High Court and Court of Appeal ruled that the non-birth mother should have primary care of the two children (mainly because the birth mother had behaved badly and removed the children to Cornwall deliberately to obstruct her former partner’s relationship with the children). However, in a landmark judgment the House of Lords ruled that the lower courts had not given sufficient weight to the fact that the birth mother was the biological mother of the children and ordered that the children should continue to live with her. The House of Lords expressly stated that the lower courts had placed too much weight on the behaviour of the birth mother and not enough on the biological basis of her relationship. This was a ‘significant consideration which was of importance’. Being the birth mother is, it seems, significant. The more recent case of T v B [2010] EWHC 1444 (Fam) involved a lesbian couple who were not civil partners but had lived together for many years and had undergone fertility treatment to conceive a child together. Once the child was born they both undertook the role of parents. Although the law at the time did not recognise the non-birth mother as a legal parent, she sought – and was given by the court – parental responsibility, which meant she had full legal authority to take decisions as a parent and to be involved in her child’s care. Following separation the birth mother applied to the courts for financial provision from the non-birth mother. The court ruled that as the non-birth mother was not a legal parent she had no financial obligation despite the fact that she had to all intents and purposes been a ‘parent’ to them from the very start. The court was somewhat constrained by the wording of the law (and its frustration was evident) but it was clear in this case that whether you were a birth mother or not was deeply significant. When the court are considering cases involving disputes about care arrangements for children, the court has a range of factors it has to take into consideration. These include: the child’s age, sex and background; their physical, emotional, educational needs; the effect of any change in circumstances; their ascertainable wishes and feelings; any harm the child has suffered or is at risk of suffering and how capable each parent is in meeting the child’s needs. The welfare of the child will be the court’s paramount consideration and any decision made by the court will be based on what the court considers to be in the child’s best interests. In practice this gives a lot of flexibility, although it is clear that the court is inclined to place weight on the importance of the biological link with the birth mother. In relation to child maintenance questions, this bias is more institutional, with clear legal rules which make only legal parents (and their spouses) financially responsible. On 6 April 2009 the law in the UK changed to allow two mothers to be named on the birth certificate, recognising them both as the legal parents and giving them both financial responsibility for their children. It is notable that both of the birth mother vs non-birth mother cases have involved children born before this legal change. Whether or not the new law will give greater weight to the non-birth mother’s position waits to be seen (although this will certainly be the case in relation to financial questions). Things are likely to be muddied further by the increasing blurring of the lines between birth and biological parenthood for lesbian couples. We are certainly seeing more egg swapping cases, where an egg has been taken from the non birth mother, fertilised and then transferred to the birth mother. Where parents in these situations separate, will the birth mother or the biological mother be the one with the upper hand? Same-sex divorces are undoubtedly legally complex where children are involved. In a dispute over a child within an alternative family structure, an argument often run is the importance of the biological link, and the genetic identity of the child. With changes to the law and even more complex family structures emerging, it will be interesting to see how the court responds.

Lesbian couple in US granted equal parental rights over child

A Florida court has granted equal parental rights to two lesbian women who created a child using the eggs from one of the women, while the other carried the baby to term. It ruled that egg donors may acquire parental rights to children resulting from their gametes under the Florida and US Constitution.
The couple, who have now separated, were involved in custody proceedings over the child, born in 2004, after the woman who provided the eggs sought legal parental status. The birth mother – who under Florida law was automatically considered to be the child's legal mother – reportedly left for Australia with the child, before returning to the USA. The sperm was provided by an anonymous donor who waived all his rights over the child.

A circuit judge initially made a ruling in favour of the birth mother, but the decision was later overturned by the Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal in December last year. The court said that Florida law, which grants parental status to the woman who carries the child only, is out of date and violates the US Constitution.

According to the Orlando Sentinel newspaper, the court said: 'This is a unique case, and the appellate courts in Florida have never before considered a case quite like it'.

Under UK law, the birth mother – who carries the child - is considered to be the child's legal mother even if she has no genetic connection to the child. The law was recently updated to recognise same-sex couples as legal parents of children. The partner of a lesbian birth mother in a civil partnership can now be considered in law to be the child's second parent, if the child was born after 6 April 2009, and can be named on the child's birth certificate. The situation is, however, more complex where the couple is not in a civil partnership.

Speaking about the Florida case to the Sentinel, Professor Nancy Polikoff, who specialises in family law at the American University Washington College of Law, said: 'Any ruling that supports the right of a same-sex couple... is important for its willingness to recognise that these families exist and a child raised in this environment shouldn't be forced to give up a parent'.

The case has reportedly been passed back to the trial judge to determine details of custody, visitation and child-support.

Article: 9th january 2012 www.bionews.org.uk

First lesbian in Britain to conceive by artificial insemination talks about her pionerring family

Janis Hetherington was the first lesbian in Britain to conceive by artificial insemination. On the 40th anniversary of her son's conception, she talks about her pioneering family, sudden death and tabloid fury.
In a sleepy Oxfordshire village 40 years ago, Janis Hetherington and her partner Judy sat in their local pub with their farming neighbours and toasted the extraordinary thing they had just done. Earlier that day the couple had driven to a clinic in London. There, a doctor inseminated her with a syringe and told her to hold her feet up for while, before they sped back to Bicester for last orders.

Janis was the first lesbian in Britain to have a child by artificial insemination. The momentous event that four decades on continues to raise eyebrows, passed at the time without fanfare and headlines. "We had no reason to come forward," Janis says. Their GP was delighted and insisted she was treated like any other expectant mother and, in January 1972, aged 26, Janis gave birth to her son, Nick, with Judy at her side. The only sign of what might be to come was when the hospital matron put her in a side ward, saying the sight of two women having a child would upset other patients.

Those prejudices towards same-sex parents exploded on to the front pages in October 1977, after two tabloid reporters, posing as lesbians who wanted to conceive, "exposed" a clinic that offered female couples insemination. Several Tory MPs responded by calling for the practice to be banned, claiming children needed "normal" parents.

Janis decided to step into the limelight and take a stand. By then, the Hetheringtons were living a settled life in north London and the unusual circumstances of Nick's conception were known and accepted within their community. She rebuffed the critics, pointing out that her son was "perfectly normal, and very intelligent". For days, reporters camped outside their door. Nick and Janis then appeared in a BBC documentary followed by a US film by NBC.

The clouds of that media storm have circled the family, on and off, ever since. Janis is 65 now and looks the arch English eccentric as she sits on a sofa in the 18th-century house in Oxfordshire that she shares with her long-term partner. She says she was aware at the time of how momentous Nick's conception was. "Yes, I knew the responsibility I had – as his mother – and also if I blew it, I'd blow it for everyone else. Other women – gay friends – had said, 'Gosh, we didn't know that was possible. Perhaps we should think about it.'"

To read more go to http://bit.ly/ipelxo

First lesbian in Britain to conceive by artificial insemination talks about her pionerring family

Janis Hetherington was the first lesbian in Britain to conceive by artificial insemination. On the 40th anniversary of her son's conception, she talks about her pioneering family, sudden death and tabloid fury.
In a sleepy Oxfordshire village 40 years ago, Janis Hetherington and her partner Judy sat in their local pub with their farming neighbours and toasted the extraordinary thing they had just done. Earlier that day the couple had driven to a clinic in London. There, a doctor inseminated her with a syringe and told her to hold her feet up for while, before they sped back to Bicester for last orders.

Janis was the first lesbian in Britain to have a child by artificial insemination. The momentous event that four decades on continues to raise eyebrows, passed at the time without fanfare and headlines. "We had no reason to come forward," Janis says. Their GP was delighted and insisted she was treated like any other expectant mother and, in January 1972, aged 26, Janis gave birth to her son, Nick, with Judy at her side. The only sign of what might be to come was when the hospital matron put her in a side ward, saying the sight of two women having a child would upset other patients.

Those prejudices towards same-sex parents exploded on to the front pages in October 1977, after two tabloid reporters, posing as lesbians who wanted to conceive, "exposed" a clinic that offered female couples insemination. Several Tory MPs responded by calling for the practice to be banned, claiming children needed "normal" parents.

Janis decided to step into the limelight and take a stand. By then, the Hetheringtons were living a settled life in north London and the unusual circumstances of Nick's conception were known and accepted within their community. She rebuffed the critics, pointing out that her son was "perfectly normal, and very intelligent". For days, reporters camped outside their door. Nick and Janis then appeared in a BBC documentary followed by a US film by NBC.

The clouds of that media storm have circled the family, on and off, ever since. Janis is 65 now and looks the arch English eccentric as she sits on a sofa in the 18th-century house in Oxfordshire that she shares with her long-term partner. She says she was aware at the time of how momentous Nick's conception was. "Yes, I knew the responsibility I had – as his mother – and also if I blew it, I'd blow it for everyone else. Other women – gay friends – had said, 'Gosh, we didn't know that was possible. Perhaps we should think about it.'"

It was when Janis met Judy, aged 24, that she began to seriously want a child. Aware she was a lesbian since the age of four, she gallivanted through a sexually adventurous youth, but when she met Judy she was looking for a relationship and was surprised to find herself falling for a woman who was not only married but the mother of a five-year-old daughter, Lisa. Within a week, they decided to settle down. Judy had separated from her husband several years earlier. "It was because of Lisa – being a mother to her, more than anything, reminded me that I could have a child and I didn't have to have a man," she says.

To read more go to

Natalie Gamble has a new home

Pride Angel is delighted to announce that our leading fertility and parenting lawyer Natalie Gamble has now moved premises.

Their new home is nestled within beautiful offices overlooking the New Forest with fabulous countryside around them, but close to the mainline station at Salisbury. Previously known as Gamble&Ghevaert, they have now changed their name to Natalie Gamble Associates and are now a team of five looking for a further lawyer.

Natalie Gamble will continue to be at the forefront of pioneering fertility work with families who need help unraveling the law in the UK within a global context. They are immensely proud of their track record which now stands at over 10 years of grappling with the law and making changes to help families get the right structures in place to secure their family as a unit.

Visit Natalie Gamble Associates website, now at www.nataliegambleassociates.com or contact them for further information.

Read more about fertility law at www.prideangel.com

To read more go to