Surrogate mother who changed her mind must hand baby to gay couple, court rules

A surrogate mother has lost custody of her child after a court ruled he would be better placed with the gay couple who arranged for her to have the baby.

A senior judge said that the child's "identity needs as a child of gay intended parents" would be better fulfilled if he lived with the couple.

The woman signed a surrogacy agreement with the men, who she had she met online, and travelled to Cyprus in September 2015 to have an embryo transferred.

But the two families fell out and the woman and her husband changed their minds about giving the child up.

She did not tell the men about the birth for more than a week after it took place last April.

The male same-sex partners began legal proceedings and last year a High Court judge ruled that the child, now 18 months old, should live with them.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/17/surrogate-mother-changed-mind-giving-baby-must-hand-child-gay/

Militant homosexuals now stealing children from their parents

Contract Law trumps the mercenary surrogate mother changing her mind...

And the SmellyBum's fascist homophobic rants..

What a surprise  !       Or not..

All this will do is reduce the amount of women will to do this for gays

If this couple was straight the judge would have ruled in favour of the mother

smelly-bandit wrote:All this will do is reduce the amount of women will to do this for gays

If this couple was straight the judge would have ruled in favour of the mother

Based on what evidence?

Tragic but she signed a legal document.

SEXY MAMA wrote:Tragic but she signed a legal document.

Is that you in your avatar?

smelly-bandit wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:Tragic but she signed a legal document.

Is that you in your avatar?

Don’t bother saying anything nasty!

SEXY MAMA wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

Is that you in your avatar?

Don’t bother saying anything nasty!

Its a lovely photo sexy..

Didge wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Don’t bother saying anything nasty!

Its a lovely photo sexy..

Thank you x

SEXY MAMA wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

Is that you in your avatar?

Don’t bother saying anything nasty!

I was just wondering why you would let people know what you looked like?

smelly-bandit wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Don’t bother saying anything nasty!

I was just wondering why you would let people know what you looked like?

It’s not such a big deal here now.

I was paranoid before when I was posting on an anti Muslim forum.

SEXY MAMA wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

I was just wondering why you would let people know what you looked like?

It’s not such a big deal here now.

I was paranoid before when I was posting on an anti Muslim forum.

But I'm a Neo-Nazi mama

Killer of old defenceless men and eater of Muslim babies

Grrrrrr

Surely you are taking your life into your own hands??

oh, here we go,,,fucking ''identity'' issues

A senior judge said that the child's "identity needs as a child of gay intended parents" would be better fulfilled if he lived with the couple.


what a load of old bollox. a child of that age needs nothing but warmth, food, a clean body, interaction and cuddles.

identity my arse!

smelly-bandit wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Don’t bother saying anything nasty!

I was just wondering why you would let people know what you looked like?

Most people like seeing what others look like.   You don't walk down the street with a bag on your head, do you?

HoratioTarr wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

I was just wondering why you would let people know what you looked like?

Most people like seeing what others look like.   You don't walk down the street with a bag on your head, do you?

I avoid people at all costs, I'm a misanthrope

smelly-bandit wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:


Most people like seeing what others look like.   You don't walk down the street with a bag on your head, do you?

I avoid people at all costs, I'm a misanthrope

Never mind.   We embrace misfits here.

gelico wrote:


oh, here we go,,,fucking ''identity'' issues

A senior judge said that the child's "identity needs as a child of gay intended parents" would be better fulfilled if he lived with the couple.


what a load of old bollox.  a child of that age needs nothing but warmth, food, a clean body, interaction and cuddles.

identity my arse!

The sperm came from one of the gay men

She agreed to this, its not biologically her child

Didge wrote:

gelico wrote:


oh, here we go,,,fucking ''identity'' issues

A senior judge said that the child's "identity needs as a child of gay intended parents" would be better fulfilled if he lived with the couple.


what a load of old bollox.  a child of that age needs nothing but warmth, food, a clean body, interaction and cuddles.

identity my arse!

The sperm came from one of the gay men

She agreed to this, its not biologically her child

yes, I'm well aware of that, thank you. I read the article

gelico wrote:

Didge wrote:


The sperm came from one of the gay men

She agreed to this, its not biologically her child

yes, I'm well aware of that, thank you.  I read the article

So why are you whinning over the gay couple rightly having their child?

Didge wrote:

gelico wrote:


yes, I'm well aware of that, thank you.  I read the article

So why are you whinning over the gay couple rightly having their child?

I am not whining over the gay couple being granted the child. I don't have a problem with that

If the judge had said ''Madam, The sperm came from one of the gay men and this is not your child. Furthermore, you agreed to this by contract'' I would have no problem with his reasoning at all. But I think the judges reasoning was totally insane.

his reasoning was ''the child's identity needs as a child of gay intended parents" would be better fulfilled if he lived with the couple''.

fucking loon!


I was hoping that your twattery last night was a result of too much sauce but I see you haven't improved much today.

I'm off out

gelico wrote:

Didge wrote:


So why are you whinning over the gay couple rightly having their child?

I am not whining over the gay couple being granted the child.  I don't have a problem with that

If the judge had said   ''Madam, The sperm came from one of the gay men and this is not your child.  Furthermore, you agreed to this by contract''  I would have no problem with his reasoning at all.  But I think the judges reasoning was totally insane.

his reasoning was   ''the child's identity needs as a child of gay intended parents" would be better fulfilled if he lived with the couple''.

fucking loon!


I was hoping that your twattery last night was a result of too much sauce but I see you haven't improved much today.  

I'm off out

Well the child was from the sperm of one of gay parents and thus the judge is right

As one is the biological parent.

The surrogate mother is not

Hence his point on identity is spot on

but the biological parentage is not mentioned by the judge either

if he had said,,,, ''The child's snatural ense of identity would be better nurtured with at least one biological parent'' would have been spot on

not,,,,

''the child's identity needs as a child of gay intended parents"

no mention of being the natural biological father at all. just gay intended. what the fuck? i thought whether [parents were gay or not should never be an issue

gelico wrote:


but the biological parentage is not mentioned by the judge either

if he had said,,,,  ''The child's snatural ense of identity would be better nurtured with at least one biological parent''  would have been spot on

not,,,,

''the child's identity needs as a child of gay intended parents"

no mention of being the natural biological father at all.  just gay intended.  what the fuck?  i thought whether [parents were gay or not should never be an issue

Especially since it's unborn

Does have an identity

This is child snatching but hate filled bigots

I hope the child learns of this and hates them later on in life

gelico wrote:


but the biological parentage is not mentioned by the judge either

if he had said,,,,  ''The child's snatural ense of identity would be better nurtured with at least one biological parent''  would have been spot on

not,,,,

''the child's identity needs as a child of gay intended parents"

no mention of being the natural biological father at all.  just gay intended.  what the fuck?  i thought whether [parents were gay or not should never be an issue

Well why would he need to mention a fact, that one of them is the biological father?

Thus the identity of the child will be to one of those gay parents

That is a biological fact

You do realise that genes will be passed on from this father, which makes it very much an identity, does it not?

Did you do biology at school?

I mean did you misss this in the article, or have I just exposed how selective you are?

Lord Justice McFarlane said that while surrogacy arrangements had no legal standing, the child's genetic relationships and welfare were the most important factors for deciding where he or she should live.

How did you miss that Gelico?

So it's just a custody battle then

But because they are gay they get full custody

Disgusting

smelly-bandit wrote:So it's just a custody battle then

But because they are gay they get full custody

Disgusting

That the biological parent won?

How is that disgusting?

SEXY MAMA wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

I was just wondering why you would let people know what you looked like?

It’s not such a big deal here now.

I was paranoid before when I was posting on an anti Muslim forum.

I was so impressed by SM's very attractive avatar (am I allowed to say that?)...that I thought I would give you all a horrible shock!

Didge wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:So it's just a custody battle then

But because they are gay they get full custody

Disgusting

That the biological parent won?

How is that disgusting?

I take it that in didges land of make believe the mother who gives birth to a child is not its biological parent

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:

It’s not such a big deal here now.

I was paranoid before when I was posting on an anti Muslim forum.

I was so impressed by SM's very attractive avatar (am I allowed to say that?)...that I thought I would give you all a horrible shock!

You will find yourself in the dirty dossier for that comment

smelly-bandit wrote:

Didge wrote:

That the biological parent won?

How is that disgusting?

I take it that in didges land of make believe the mother who gives birth to a child is not its biological parent

She is not the biological mother

Do you understand biology smelly?

What DNA has the surrogate mother passed on smelly?

She may possible pass on a small amount, carrying the child, but does that make her the biological mother?

I am going to love this debate, as I know you are ignorant on science  

Would you like me to help you here?

smelly-bandit wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

I was so impressed by SM's very attractive avatar (am I allowed to say that?)...that I thought I would give you all a horrible shock!

You will find yourself in the dirty dossier for that comment

Since I am, apparently, Right wing, far Right, alt. Right, ultra right, Nazi, Fascist, EDL supporter, the BNP's press officer, homophobic, racist, Freemason and a member of the Tufty Club, I don't suppose another entry on my CV will make a great deal of difference.

gelico wrote:
oh, here we go,,,fucking ''identity'' issues

A senior judge said that the child's "identity needs as a child of gay intended parents" would be better fulfilled if he lived with the couple.


what a load of old bollox.  a child of that age needs nothing but warmth, food, a clean body, interaction and cuddles.

identity my arse!

Except...
They don't stay babies forever..

If the child was adopted by the surrogate/birth mother (not the actual (anonymous ?) biological mother..), than in 10, 15 or 20 years the older and questioning child could well be asking why they had been given to the birth mother instead of an actual parent.

Once again your obvious bigotries have over-ridden any actual rational thinking, oh jelly-bellied hippo'..

Didge wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

I take it that in didges land of make believe the mother who gives birth to a child is not its biological parent

She is not the biological mother

Do you understand biology smelly?

What DNA has the surrogate mother passed on smelly?

She may possible pass on a small amount, carrying the child, but does that make her the biological mother?

I am going to love this debate, as I know you are ignorant on science  

Would you like me to help you here?

The mother of the child is not the biological mother??

Wow we really are down the rabbit hole here.

I don't think I need to say anything more

smelly-bandit wrote:

Didge wrote:


She is not the biological mother

Do you understand biology smelly?

What DNA has the surrogate mother passed on smelly?

She may possible pass on a small amount, carrying the child, but does that make her the biological mother?

I am going to love this debate, as I know you are ignorant on science  

Would you like me to help you here?

The mother of the child is not the biological mother??

Wow we really are down the rabbit hole here.

I don't think I need to say anything more

Like i said, this would be fun

What is surrogate smelly?

It would be best for you, if you reamined quite, but I am expecting you to make a further tool of yourself

Lets here the wisdom of smelly on his biology

Take as long as you like mate

Do you need to phone a friend?

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

gelico wrote:
oh, here we go,,,fucking ''identity'' issues

A senior judge said that the child's "identity needs as a child of gay intended parents" would be better fulfilled if he lived with the couple.


what a load of old bollox.  a child of that age needs nothing but warmth, food, a clean body, interaction and cuddles.

identity my arse!

Except...
They don't stay babies forever..

If the child was adopted by the surrogate/birth mother (not the actual (anonymous ?) biological mother..), than in 10, 15 or 20 years the older and questioning child could well be asking why they had been given to the birth mother instead of an actual parent.

Once again your obvious bigotries have over-ridden any actual rational thinking,  oh jelly-bellied hippo'..

Seriously, why are you bothering mate?

She would have been lost at the word "if"

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

You will find yourself in the dirty dossier for that comment

Since I am, apparently, Right wing, far Right, alt. Right, ultra right, Nazi, Fascist, EDL supporter, the BNP's press officer, homophobic, racist, Freemason and a member of the Tufty Club, I don't suppose another entry on my CV will make a great deal of difference.

Huh

Your CV is puny.

I have all those plus

"putins personal spy Master"

"Climate change heretic"

"meat eating murderer of small animals"

And general all round meany

smelly-bandit wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Since I am, apparently, Right wing, far Right, alt. Right, ultra right, Nazi, Fascist, EDL supporter, the BNP's press officer, homophobic, racist, Freemason and a member of the Tufty Club, I don't suppose another entry on my CV will make a great deal of difference.

Huh

Your CV is puny.

I have all those plus

"putins personal spy Master"

"Climate change heretic"

"meat eating murderer of small animals"

And general all round meany

Man you have glossed up your CV

I thought it had only one specialized skill

Expertize in being a dimwit?

smelly-bandit wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Since I am, apparently, Right wing, far Right, alt. Right, ultra right, Nazi, Fascist, EDL supporter, the BNP's press officer, homophobic, racist, Freemason and a member of the Tufty Club, I don't suppose another entry on my CV will make a great deal of difference.

Huh

Your CV is puny.

I have all those plus

"putins personal spy Master"

"Climate change heretic"

"meat eating murderer of small animals"

And general all round meany

Ah, but you haven't been "outed" as a member of the Tufty Club. Bloody dangerous subversive organisation, that is.

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

Huh

Your CV is puny.

I have all those plus

"putins personal spy Master"

"Climate change heretic"

"meat eating murderer of small animals"

And general all round meany

Ah, but you haven't been "outed" as a member of the Tufty Club. Bloody dangerous subversive organisation, that is.

You have me trumped on that one

smelly-bandit wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:

It’s not such a big deal here now.

I was paranoid before when I was posting on an anti Muslim forum.

But I'm a Neo-Nazi mama

Killer of old defenceless men and eater of Muslim babies

Grrrrrr

Surely you are taking your life into your own hands??

Lol

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:

It’s not such a big deal here now.

I was paranoid before when I was posting on an anti Muslim forum.

I was so impressed by SM's very attractive avatar (am I allowed to say that?)...that I thought I would give you all a horrible shock!

Thank you.

Fred you look exactly like what I imagined you to look like x

I always imagine Fred looking like that old Landrover in his previous avvie...

I didn't think surrogate mothers could be made to give up their own kid. However, don't agree to have a kid for someone else if you're not going to see it through.

smelly-bandit wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:Tragic but she signed a legal document.

Is that you in your avatar?

You gotta problem with that, Russ? She's as elegant in her picture as she is in her words.

Who was the 'owner' of the egg? Becaeue if the egg used was hers then she is the mother.
If she was just the host body, carrying an embryo which is biologically not hers, then she's not the mother.

Didge wrote:

gelico wrote:


oh, here we go,,,fucking ''identity'' issues

A senior judge said that the child's "identity needs as a child of gay intended parents" would be better fulfilled if he lived with the couple.


what a load of old bollox.  a child of that age needs nothing but warmth, food, a clean body, interaction and cuddles.

identity my arse!

The sperm came from one of the gay men

She agreed to this, its not biologically her child

This is the crux of the matter.  Only the gay man has a biological connection to the child, so there is no advantage going to the mother.  As one judge said:

Judge McFarlane wrote:the child's genetic relationships and welfare were the most important factors

No one is taking something from the mother to which the other side doesn't have a superior biological right.  She carried the baby so both have an equal parental right.

The contract is secondary, though it too is persuasive.  In a case in which the balance is equal, the contract shows the intent of the biological parents, and is binding but can be modified.  It's just like a custody agreement in a divorce.

This is actually quite an easy case.  If someone were taking a baby from a biological mother, and, under contract solely, giving him to another person, that would be the difficult case.  We actually have several cases like that, arising in New York City.  The child has been awarded to a non-biological parent solely under contract law.

The mother has no superior right in this case.

I don't think you should take a baby away from a parent it has been living with since birth.

I think joint custody would be fairer.

eddie wrote:Who was the 'owner' of the egg? Becaeue if the egg used was hers then she is the mother.
If she was just the host body, carrying an embryo which is biologically not hers, then she's not the mother.

I thought the woman who actually gave birth is considered to be the mother, regardless of the biology. I also didn't think that such a contract was considered enforceable when it comes to surrogacy, and the article confirms that.

eddie wrote:I don't think you should take a baby away from a parent it has been living with since birth.

I think joint custody would be fairer.

I respect your opinion. But under Anglo-American law the biological connection is paramount.