LogFAQs > #891829479

s0nicfan posted...

So wait... does that mean if a same sex couple has a baby, rather than listing the biological parents (which I assume is what they did with sperm donors), they want to list the mother and the adoptive significant other? Won't that cause issues with tracking because now birth certificates will effectively lie about the origins of a baby?

Note that I support same sex marriage and adoption, but I feel like there's a practical reason for having the real, biological parents on a birth certificate that transcend politics.

this already isn't how birth certificates work, though. For married couples, most states require that the spouse be listed on the birth certificate regardless of their biological lineage. That is how Arkansas is, at least.

I believe this particular thing is more commonly a complaint with lesbian couples than gay male couples.

edit:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/supreme-court-arkansas-must-list-same-sex-parents-names-birth-n776746

The court ruled 6-3 in favor of two married same-sex couples who conceived their children through anonymous sperm donations. They sued after the state said it would put only the name of the birth mother on the birth certificate but not her female spouse.

The court said Arkansas has chosen "to make its birth certificates more than a marker of biological relationships: the state uses those certificates to give married parents a form of legal recognition to unmarried parents."
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.