Two men legally give birth

[Botnst]

Judge: 2 adoptive dads belong on birth certificate
By JANET McCONNAUGHEY – 2 hours ago

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — A same-sex couple in California has won a federal court ruling that their adopted son's Louisiana birth certificate must bear the names of both adoptive fathers.

The facts are so clear that no trial is needed, U.S. District Judge Jay Zainey wrote.

"What a great Christmas present for these guys!" said Kenneth D. Upton Jr. who represented Oren Adar and Mickey Ray Smith of San Diego.

In his ruling Monday, Zainey said Louisiana's Office of Vital Records must give full faith and credit to the New York State court in which Adar and Smith adopted the boy, he ruled Monday. The office had refused to issue a birth certificate listing both as the boy's legal parents.

Upton, reached at home Saturday evening, said he hopes to get a birth certificate in the coming week but doesn't know whether the Louisiana Attorney General's Office — which is in charge, although a state health department attorney argued the case — will decide to appeal.

The attorney general's office will look into the matter next week, said Tammi Arender Herring, spokeswoman for Attorney General James "Buddy" Caldwell. Upton, of Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund Inc. of Dallas, said it is the fourth case of its kind that he knows of. Cases in Oklahoma, Virginia and Mississippi also were decided in the parents' favor — the Mississippi case decided at trial about a month ago, he said. Adar and Smith say they have practical and emotional reasons for wanting both of their names on the birth certificate of the boy, identified only as "J.C. A.-S."

Because Smith's name wasn't on the document, his employer initially refused to enroll the child on his insurance, Smith wrote in a sworn statement. Smith, an accountant, is the family's breadwinner.

The administrator eventually agreed to cover the boy, but "I am forced to go through this process each and every year" to keep him insured, Smith wrote. "As an adopted child myself, I understand the need a child has to feel like he or she belongs," Smith wrote. "I remember as a child wanting to see my own birth certificate and to see my parents listed because it gave me a sense of belonging, a sense of identity and a sense of dignity." Adar also said the family often travels, and because the boy is black and they are white, an airline worker once stopped them, thinking they were kidnapping the child. "Every time we fly, we fear this could happen again," he wrote.

J. was born about eight weeks prematurely in Shreveport, in late 2005. He spent his first month in the hospital, and weighed 5 pounds when his mother gave him to Adar and Smith that December, according to Adar's statement. Their adoption was made final on April 27, 2006, their lawsuit states.

Refusing to name both fathers on the birth certificate "singles out unmarried same-sex couples and their adoptive children for unequal treatment for the improper purpose of making them unequal to everyone else," said the lawsuit filed by Upton and Regina O. Matthews of New Orleans.

Louisiana law does not let two unmarried people adopt a child together, regardless of sex, wrote Carol L. Haynes, representing the state health department and registrar Darlene W. Smith.

Earlier this month, New York state officials decided to let married same-sex couples list both their names on their children's birth certificates.

Zainey wrote that Louisiana law requires a new certificate when it gets an adoption decree, and the law does not include any limits or restrictions. The state's arguments would make the adoption law's "plain language ... meaningless by reading in restrictions and requirements that simply are not present in the text of the statute," he wrote.

Upton said most states have not had problems listing both same-sex parents on an adopted child's amended birth certificate. The difficulties crop up in states that don't allow adoption by same-sex couples, he said, and some registrars question whether a man's name should be in the space labeled "Mother," or a woman's name listed as "Father."

"A lot of states have recently started changing their form so it says `Parent 1' and 'Parent 2,' which kind of resolves the problem," Upton said.

[mgburg]

Well...goody for the two guys...they got what they wanted...

Now, we just wait for a few years (10-20) to see if that's what the child really wanted...

"Therapy for EVERYONE!"

[Hatterasguy]

Thats just wrong.

[tankdriver]

Do they normally put adoptive parents' names on birth certificates? It seems to me that if you aren't the biological parent, your name shouldn't be on it. If it is standard practice to put non-biological parents on birth certificates, then what difference does gender make?

[Carleton Hughes]

The jedge's name,Zainey.......ought to tell you right there.

[mgburg]

Originally Posted by tankdriver

Do they normally put adoptive parents' names on birth certificates? It seems to me that if you aren't the biological parent, your name shouldn't be on it. If it is standard practice to put non-biological parents on birth certificates, then what difference does gender make?

When I adopted my ex's son, they took off the biological sperm-donor's name and information and replaced it with mine...we got the "new" one (BC) from the state of his birth, notorized and stamped with the official seal...just like the real deal...

I believe the difference is...biologically, if the ex and I said nothing to our son, he'd have no reason to believe he was anything close to being adopted...whereas...

*DING!*

Therapy time....

[tankdriver]

Originally Posted by mgburg

When I adopted my ex's son, they took off the biological sperm-donor's name and information and replaced it with mine...we got the "new" one (BC) from the state of his birth, notorized and stamped with the official seal...just like the real deal...

I believe the difference is...biologically, if the ex and I said nothing to our son, he'd have no reason to believe he was anything close to being adopted...whereas...

*DING!*

Therapy time....

If you have a name on the birth certificate that belongs to someone who wasn't involved with the birth, then biology has already taken a back seat.

If a hetero couple adopts and they get both names put on the birth certificate, how is it different than a gay couple? Both certificates would have the names of people who did not have a child come out of their vagina.

[sfloriII]

Well this brings new hope to me and my wonderful relationship with my dog. If I adopt a baby maybe now both Fido and I can be listed on the certificate!

This slippery slope is sickening. UGH

[Botnst]

Let's say you're adopted and want to know whether a particular illness you have is heritable. Let's say you look-up your birth certificate and the parents named on it are not your biological parents.

Who ya gonna call, Ghost Busters?

[riorust]

Originally Posted by sfloriII

Well this brings new hope to me and my wonderful relationship with my dog. If I adopt a baby maybe now both Fido and I can be listed on the certificate!

This slippery slope is sickening. UGH

That was too funny!

[mgburg]

Originally Posted by tankdriver

If you have a name on the birth certificate that belongs to someone who wasn't involved with the birth, then biology has already taken a back seat.

If a hetero couple adopts and they get both names put on the birth certificate, how is it different than a gay couple? Both certificates would have the names of people who did not have a child come out of their vagina.

Hey tank...let's slow this down a bit...

Let's say I have three cages...

Cage #1.) 1 Female chimp, 1 Male chimp

Cage #2.) 2 Female chimps, 0 Male chimps

Cage #3.) 2 Male chimps, 0 Female chimps

Knowing what the Biology Classes USED TO TEACH (God knows what they've been teaching the past 35 years... ), which cage will possibly have a baby chimp (or chimps) in a little while? (Assuming, for the sake of an argument, that the Male only cage doesn't either fling sperm over to the Female cage or the 2 Males manage to choke each other (and I don't mean their chickens either!)).

Now, assuming that any rational child, let alone adult can read and figure out that Cage #1 is the winner of the genetics-for-another-generation contest, what is the said child going to think about his role in the whole thing?

Mom (whatever that would be...) didn't give a chit to keep me...(Therapy time) or whatever the "regular" kids are going to bombard him with?

Remember, the "guys" got what they wanted...no consideration (Long-term thought processes and planning needed to be considered, but weren't.) for the child involved...

The attorneys got paid...
The Judge has his pension...
The "boys" are happy...

And the kid...

Someone else's problem...

[mgburg]

Originally Posted by Botnst

Let's say you're adopted and want to know whether a particular illness you have is heritable. Let's say you look-up your birth certificate and the parents named on it are not your biological parents.

Who ya gonna call, Ghost Busters?

What good does looking up the illness of a parent (either alive, known, unknown or dead) do? We're able to yank DNA off a cigarette and determine the killer's last meal...a BC is just a piece of paper that says "Someone cares about you." - or not...

[MTUpower]

I'm adopted. My birth certificate listed my parents on it- and not the biological ones. Many states allow the biological parents to NOT be on the BC because at the time they do not want to be on it for any number of reasons. My BM knew she was going to "give me up" and other BM's know the same thing and do not want further contact with the offspring. The BF may have the same reasoning. As far as inheritable disorders, well there is a mechanism in place- the medical history of adopted children is kept on file at the state office, and can be viewed by the child, or the mother if she finds out later she has some issue can send the info to the office and it will send it to the child. I found out 3 years ago that my BM has Marfan syndrome, and her father and grand father most likely also had it it and died of it. I've been tested and been determined to have it and passed it along to at least one of my sons. I've also been asked by my BM if I wanted to have contact and we corresponded thru the wisc state office until such time that we both wanted to know each others true identity. That was about 18 months ago. My four siblings are also adopted, and my parents were foster parents to two others before "us". I can say in my case and in most cases I have experience in that while adoption seems great, it's not all it's cracked up to be. Those who adopt children of a race other than their own tend to have much greater difficulties in many areas. For this reason I am against extra racial adoptions. While I understand that if I see a brown cow I cannot believe all cows are brown, I know of five parent/child extra racial families and none of the children are happy about it. I do not agree with two men's name on a BC, nor do I think two men or two women ought to be able to adopt a child under any circumstances. Some things are learned, and some things hereditary. Adopting a child has profound consequences.

[aklim]

Originally Posted by tankdriver

If it is standard practice to put non-biological parents on birth certificates, then what difference does gender make?

Why do some pharmacists feel they have the right not to dispense birth control that a MD or NP prescribes? Because it crosses their moral lines. So, what difference does gender make? Probably none but it crosses some of their moral lines that they choose to bring to work so they will refuse it on those grounds.

[mgburg]

MTUpower has said it better than ANYONE on this posting...he knows because he is it...he has lived it and knows what it is PERSONALLY...

Is there someone else, with the same "pedigree" (sorry 'bout that) that has a completely opposite story with an "...and they lived happily ever after..." twag to it?

And I go back to what I said the first time...who does this benefit?

Certainly not the child...