Press one of the expand buttons to see the full text of an article. Later press collapse to revert to the original form. The buttons below expand or collapse all articles.
Court Allows Two Mothers
Comedians Strike Back
January 2, 2007 permalink
Following the report of an Ontario court legalizing two mothers and a father for one boy, critics have struck back with the most suitable tool — ridicule.
January 2, 2007
Having two moms now legal in Ontario
TORONTO — An Ontario boy can legally have two mothers and a father, the province's highest court ruled Tuesday.
The same-sex partner of the child's biological mother went to court seeking to also be declared a mother of the boy.
After hearing arguments in 2003, Superior Court Justice David Aston dismissed the application saying he didn't have the jurisdiction to rule in the case.
Court was told the child has three parents: his biological father and mother (identified in court documents as B.B. and C.C., respectively) and C.C.'s partner, the appellant A.A.
A.A. and C.C. have been in a stable same-sex union since 1990. In 1999, they decided to start a family with the assistance of their friend B.B.
The two women would be the primary caregivers of the child, but they believed it would be in the child's best interests that B.B. remain involved in the child's life.
The boy refers to A.A. and C.C. as his mothers.
Justice Aston indicated that had he thought he had jurisdiction, he would have made ruled that A.A. was also the boy's mother.
“The child is a bright, healthy, happy individual who is obviously thriving in a loving family that meets his every need,” the decision reads.
“The applicant has been a daily and consistent presence in his life. She is fully committed to a parental role. She has the support of the two biological parents who themselves recognize her equal status with them.”
A.A. and C.C. did not apply for an adoption order because, if they did so, B.B. would lose his status under the Child and Family Services Act.
“Perhaps one of the greatest fears faced by lesbian mothers is the death of the birth mother,” the appeal court heard. “Without a declaration of parentage or some other order, the surviving partner would be unable to make decisions for their minor child, such as critical decisions about health care.”
The Children's Law Reform Act does not reflect current society, the appeal court judges ruled.
“There is no doubt that the Legislature did not foresee for the possibility of declarations of parentage for two women, but that is a product of the social conditions and medical knowledge at the time,” they wrote. “The Legislature did not turn its mind to that possibility, so that over 30 years later the gap in the legislation has been revealed.”
As a result, the statute does not provide for the best interests of the child in this case, the judges said.
“The Act does not deal with, nor contemplate, the disadvantages that a child born into a relationship of two mothers, two fathers or as in this case two mothers and one father might suffer.”
The Attorney General for Ontario did not chose to intervene to support the legislation, the ruling noted.
Source: Globe and Mail
Here are some published comments from the same website:
Scot Loucks from Pickering, Canada writes: Did I read that right? Did common sense actually prevail in a Family court in Ontario? Next thing you know, the Leafs may win the cup.... Check your basements people, I believe Hell has frozen over.
May Spencer from Sudbury, Canada writes: How many more of these ridiculous court rulings do we have to endure? Is this another ruling by a judge with a conflict of interest?
Paul Kruger from Vernon, Canada writes: So, in our society, it's conceivable that a child born from a surrogate mother to a woman unable to have children, is given up for adoption, then adopted by 2 lesbians, and is subsequently declared to have 4 mothers ... and 1 father? What happens if the 2 Lesbians divorce and remarry 2 other women and each of them apply for parental rights? Possibly 6 mothers? But perhaps 1 of them may remarry a man (that sure would be old-fashioned) and then it may be 5 mothers and 2 fathers. Now, it's REALLY important for a child to be loved and cared for ... no question about that, but please allow us old-timers the right to shake our heads in amazement at the rapid rate of change underlying Canada's social experimentation - in rewriting what constitutes a family. "The times ... they sure are a changing!" It's time to go and give those 2 rare old relics (dear old mom and dad) a big hug!
Big Chief Walksonwater from Caledonia Ontario from writes: Oh, boy! Don't get me started. This world is getting weirder and weirder.
Bob Rollheiser from Canada writes: It's starting to look like the old saying about it taking a whole village to raise a child is coming true.
Stews 49 from Canada writes: It just keeps going round and round. Man this country is losing it fast! What would make it the top story is if one of the parents(?) has dual citizenship.
Mr Fijne from Canada writes: Why not three, four or five? Let's be inclusive!
J Luft from Calgary, Canada writes: More judicial stupidity.
kimberli hart from Canada writes: Disregarding the 'politically correct' issue of same sex relationships, aren't 'mother' and 'father' terms used to describe the female and male who produced a child? If there are concerns about both ladies wanting legal authority over the child, then make one a guardian. I fail to understand why political correctness should get in the way of basic biological facts. Does anyone else feel compelled to stop the insanity that is PC? Everytime I contradict PC I get labelled 'racist', 'sexist', 'homophobic' etc...
Raymond Baden from Calgary, Canada writes: Three, presumably, loving parents? That's one very lucky kid right there. :)
John L. Murlowe from City of East Vancouver Island, Canada writes: It used to be so confusing with just a mother and a father. Many thanks to the courts for making children's lives so much simpler these days.
Mike W from Canada writes: And you wonder why children have psychological problems!
Gardiner Westbound from Canada writes: Is there a reservoir of lunatic social engineers somewhere from which the government selects judges?
Dark Angel from The West, Canada writes: I suppose this means that the two moms will be able to nail one father for child support!
And here is a comment by Karol Karolak not on the web:
- From appellate court's decision and reasons: "The Act does not deal with, nor contemplate, the disadvantages that a child born into a relationship of two mothers, two fathers or as in this case two mothers and one father might suffer." I have yet to read of two men producing a child, as I am sure that such news would be the medical curiosity of the century. From now on, however, I can sleep well knowing that in Ontario forward looking judges have already anticipated such a possibility and made legal provisions for it. One thing bugs me however, what happens when we get sperm donor (provisionally call him a father), egg donor (provisionally call her a mother) and a pig delegated to the task of pregnancy and childbirth? Such a scenario is much closer to medical reality then two men producing a baby. My question relates to the legal status of the pig. Giving birth to a human baby qualifies the pig as a mother, opening a Pandora's box of who gets child benefits, who becomes legal guardians and so on. I do not want to be facetious here as it is perfectly possible to use for this exercise frozen sperm and egg from long dead donors. If that were the case we would have a living pig giving birth to a human child and in case of lack of living human relatives of sperm and egg donors, the pig is the closest biological relative of the child. In a case like this does the pig gets the custody of the child?