The Australian - "Gay Dad in Appeal to Find Son" by AAP

A GAY father has launched an international appeal for help to find his son, whom he believes may be living in Australia.

Michael Turberville has not seen seven-year-old son Ashley Skinner since the child disappeared with his mother, Joanne Skinner, more than a year ago after a custody battle, British media reported today.

Mr Turberville pleaded with anyone who knew the boy's whereabouts to alert authorities.

"It is gut-wrenching not to be able to see my son," he told the Evening Standard newspaper.

Dual US-British citizen Mr Turberville reportedly fathered Ashley with Ms Skinner after advertising in another publication for a "like-minded" lesbian. Both parents were in same-sex relationships at the time.

Ms Skinner's mother received a letter from her in April sent from the US, but Mr Turberville believes it was written in Australia and passed on to someone in America to post.

The letter said Ashley had started school.

The UK's top family court judge, High Court family division president Sir Mark Potter, took the unusual step of lifting reporting restrictions which apply in children's cases in hopes the publicity would help trace Ashley.

Anyone with information was asked to contact the Royal Courts of Justice in London on +44 207 947 6200.


[Link: Original Article ]

The Advertiser - "30 South Australian lesbian mums 'impregnated by same man" by Tony Shepherd

UNREGULATED sperm donation is leading to unusual situations in which the children of lesbians in Adelaide are mixing socially - creating a risk of incest.

One of South Australia's foremost experts in reproductive technology - Reverend Dr Andrew Dutney - says that in one reported case, about 30 lesbians were impregnated by sperm from one man.

The mothers then organised picnics with all the children, raising the fear they might socialise with their half-siblings without realising they are related.

In another case, a man's sperm was used to produce 29 children, most of whom are living in Adelaide. They do not know who their half-siblings are, raising concerns that in a "big country town" like Adelaide, they could accidentally commit incest.

In South Australia it has become standard practice to identify sperm donors, which has put men off donating through reproductive clinics.

Fertility treatments do not generally cater to homosexuals, because the law says it is only for infertile couples or those at risk of transmitting a serious defect.

These factors combine to push many people wanting children to seek help elsewhere - either through "turkey basters" or casual sex with friends or willing participants found online.

Assoc Prof Dutney, the former chair of the SA Council on Reproductive Technology and Associate Professor of Theology at Flinders University, says the SA regulations are at fault and should be repealed altogether, leaving reproductive medical units to comply with the national ethical guidelines.

He uses the anecdote of the "very generous" sperm donor to emphasise that when people are excluded from access to reproductive technology, it forces them to go it alone, and have children outside the normal system.

Those children were born about a decade ago, meaning they will be reaching adolescence in the next few years.

"The effect of our regulations here in SA is that they produce unregulated donor conception, whereas a system with a lighter touch would bring a whole lot more parents and children into the light," Assoc Prof Dutney said.

"The situation at the moment is that ... by adhering to the SA legislation, clinics have to be in breach of the national code.

"Under SA's legislation, anonymity is guaranteed while under the national code of ethics, the child's access to knowledge has to be provided."

A different man's sperm was used to produce 29 children, most of whom are living in Adelaide. Again, they don't know they are related.

Leonie Hewitt is the mother of one of the children in Adelaide from the second example mentioned above. She is also the spokeswoman for the Sydney-based Donor Conception Support Group of Australia.

She says people need to recognise the "human rights" of the children in all of this.

"There needs to be consistent national legislation," she said.

"We need to protect people who are conceived through donations whether in straight or homosexual families, we need to protect those children.

"We need national harmonising legislation that protects human rights."

[Link: Original Article ]

Australian Gay & Lesbian Law Blog - "QLD: Fatherhood Just Got More Interesting" by Stephen Page

Stephen Page from Brisbane, Queensland, Australia is a partner with Harrington Family Lawyers, Brisbane, a long established boutique family law firm. He writes a wonderful blog called "Australian Gay and Lesbian Law Blog". [Ed - Rodney Cruise]


Back in May I posted about how Queensland Attorney Kerry Shine was seeking to amend the Status of Children Act so that the position of IVF dads becamse clear- if they were to donate sperm to single mums or a lesbian couple, then they would not be dads in law.

I had chased up Kerry Shine's office- twice- as to whether the proposed changes would cover men offering sperm to their female friends, but my calls were not returned and I was none the wiser.

Last week a friend told me that he was considering donating sperm via a website: http://www.free-sperm-donations.com/ . He ultimately had second thoughts.

At the time that Kerry Shine made the announcement, he considered that part of the reason for making the changes was so that sperm donors to IVF women would not be fathers and therefore would not be required to pay child support. He proposed that the laws be retrospective to 1988- when the Status of Children Act was enacted!

Because of my friend's situation, I looked over the weekend, and found that tucked in at the back of the Guardianship and Administration and Other Acts Amendment Bill were these proposed changes.

So what do they mean? If enacted, the Bill would make ensure that if a woman other than a married woman were to have a child by a sperm donor- if she were to go through IVF, then the donor will NOT be the father and will never have the rights of fatherhood unless and until he marries her. It doesn't matter if the woman and the man agree that he is to have those rights- that agreement is irrelevant.

However, if the man donates sperm to the mother other than through IVF, then it is possible that he might be considered to be the father, in which case there would be certain rights under the Family Law Act, including the presumption of equal parental responsibility, and the obligation to pay child support.

Although there are two decisions of the Family Court which in part dealt with Victorian legislation which would suggest that the known sperm donor would not be a father or parent under the Family Law Act and under child support legislation, there is no guarantee that that court will follow the same approach with the Queensland legislation, especially when the Attorney expressly stated that part of the purpose of the legislation was so that donors would not have to pay child support. If the legislation that he is proposing does not include known donations other than via IVF, then this of itself raises the possibility that known donors other than through IVF might be treated as fathers and liable to pay child support (and seek to make decisions about the child and spend time with the child, maybe even equal time, relying on the Family Law Act).



[Link: Original Article]

Australian Gay & Lesbian Law Blog - "Children born after donor insemination should be told as soon as possible about their conception" by Stephen Page

Stephen Page from Brisbane, Queensland, Australia is a partner with Harrington Family Lawyers, Brisbane, a long established boutique family law firm. He writes a wonderful blog called "Australian Gay and Lesbian Law Blog". [Ed - Rodney Cruise]

It is better for children conceived by donor insemination to be told of their origins at an early age, according to the first large-scale study of people who are aware of their donor conception. If the children are not told until they are 18 or older, they are more likely to have feelings of shock and anger, the 24th annual meeting of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology in Barcelona heard.

The study is one of the first to compare the views of offspring of donor insemination told of their origins during childhood compared with those who only found out in adulthood. The researchers recruited a sample of 165 offspring conceived by sperm donation through the Donor Sibling Registry – a US-based, worldwide website that enables donor offspring to search for their donors and their donor siblings (other donor offspring who share the same donor). The participants answered an online questionnaire consisting of multiple-choice and open-ended questions. They were aged 13-61; 148 (89%) were living in the USA and four (2%) were living in the UK; the majority (approximately three-quarters) were female.

Dr Vasanti Jadva, a research associate at the Centre for Family Research, University of Cambridge (UK), found that children born into mother-only or same-sex parent families were much more likely to be told about their origins before the age of three than were children of heterosexual parents: 63%, 56% and 9% respectively. Indeed, 33% of children in heterosexual families were told about their conception after the age of 18, compared with none in the other two types of families. Two children from heterosexual parents only found out when told by people who were not their parents.

Dr Jadva said: "We asked the offspring how they felt at the time they found out about their conception, excluding those that found out before the age of three as they would have been too young to recall their feelings. For all offspring, the most common feeling was curiosity, irrespective of the age at which they found out. However, there were differences according to the age at which they had been told of their conception, with those told during adulthood more likely to report feeling confused, shocked, upset, relieved, numb and angry."

For instance, 37% of those told when aged 4-11 reported feeling confused, compared to 52% told when aged 12-18, and 69% told when aged over 18. In the respective age groups, 27%, 58% and 75% respectively reported feeling shocked; 16%, 23% and 44% reported feeling upset; 6%, 26% and 38% reported feeling relieved; 6%, 26% and 38% reported feeling numb; and 12%, 13% and 38% reported feeling angry.

Examples of comments made by the participants included:

"I would have appreciated revelation of this information much earlier in my life. Learning of my biological identity at 17 years of age was a traumatic event." A 30-year-old, found out at age 17.

"I am angry because I asked about being 'adopted' several times throughout my childhood and adolescence and told that I was being foolish. I knew." Someone who found out at age 50

"Either tell your kid from the beginning or don't tell them at all, it was one of the most shocking and upsetting moments of my life. I felt alone." A 19-year-old, found out at age 12.

"I was so young I don't remember feeling much more than interested and curious." A 13-year-old who found out at age four.

Dr Jadva said: "With regards to how offspring felt towards their mother at the time of finding out, offspring told in adolescence or adulthood were more likely to report feeling angry about being lied to and betrayal. Those told as children were more likely to state that it made no difference to how they felt towards their mother compared to those told later in life." According to whether they were told between 4-11, 12-18 or over 18, 12%, 29% and 47% respectively felt angry at being lied to, and 12%, 23% and 34% felt betrayal. There were no statistically significant differences in feelings of offspring towards their father at the time of disclosure.

When asked how they felt currently about their conception, the most common response was curiosity, reported by 69% of offspring. There were significant differences for those feeling angry, relieved and shocked, with those told after the age of 18 more likely to report these feelings. By contrast, a 15-year-old, told before the age of three, commented: "I've grown up knowing how I was conceived. I've always been accepting to it because I never knew any different. Now that I am a little older the only thing that's changed is that I'm a bit more curious."

Dr Jadva concluded: "This study shows that age of disclosure is important in determining donor offspring's feeling about their conception. It appears it is better for children to be told about their donor conception at an early age. This finding is in line with research on adoption, which also shows that children benefit from early disclosure about the circumstances of their birth.

"In light of the trend toward greater openness, it is important we recognise that telling offspring of their conception may evoke a sense of curiosity about their origins which could lead them to seek out their donor relations. In fact, we have found that offspring show high levels of interest in contacting not only their donor, but also their donor siblings. Offspring from this study have gone on to find an average of four donor siblings, with a maximum of 13."

[Link: Original Article]

Time Out Sydney - "Doting Dads" by Andrew Georgiou

However and whenever the calling to be a dad arises, the fact is that gay men make incredibly loving, nurturing and open-minded parents. In this special report, Andrew Georgiou looks at the different roads to gay fatherhood in Australia.

Click on the images to see full size.




Doting Dads

However and whenever the calling to be a dad arises, the fact is that gay men make incredibly loving, nurturing and open-minded parents. In this special report, Andrew Georgiou looks at the different roads to gay fatherhood in Australia.

Parental instincts. Some men are born with them, for others the desire to be a gay dad kicks in later in life. Gay Dads Australia is a national group of gay men who celebrate the joys of fatherhood through online forums, social gatherings and exchange of resources on their website which has been operating for just over five years.

Rodney Cruise, 42, runs the Gay Dads Australia website which boasts over 400 members between NSW and Victoria. While Cruise and his partner 39-year-old Jeff Chiang have experienced the joys of parenting their 15-month-old son Ethan through a surrogacy arrangement they underwent in the United States, Cruise notes that gay dads across the country have fulfilled their dreams of fatherhood through a variety of scenarios.

“We have dads who have become fathers through known donor arrangements, co-parenting agreements, surrogacy and those with children through previous relationships with women”.

Each situation varies, but the fact remains: a greatly loved child is the ultimate outcome.

Surrogacy

Mostly exercised through surrogacy agencies in the United States, this process is proving to be increasingly popular with gay men in Australia with the desire to be full time dads. Surrogacy sees a gay man or gay male couple firstly choosing an egg donor through a clinic and fertilizing that egg with one of the couple’s sperm. With the assistance of a surrogacy agency, the male couple are introduced to a surrogate whom through IVF, will be implanted with the fertilized egg and carry the baby for the couple to full term. The surrogate is in no way linked to the child, leaving the biological father and his partner as the legal parents to raise the child in Australia.

In 2006 Cruise and Chiang were blessed with their first son Ethan through the assistance of US based Surrogacy agency Growing Generations, which has helped over 500 couples become parents. Their affection and connection with their chosen surrogate developed so strongly during her pregnancy with their son, Rodney and Jeff extended their family network to include Kelly into their now 15 month old son Ethan’s life.

“Even though they are in the US and we live here, Kelly and her family are now a part of ours”, says Jeff.

“Women like her, do this because they genuinely want to help people become parents”. Cruise’s partner Jeff comes from a traditional Taiwanese family which has a long history of basing family on geography rather than biology.

“Jeff’s extended family is made up of people who have descended from his parents village who are often not biologically related. When you think about it these were the first alternative families, and Jeff and I continue that tradition by creating our sense of family as loving and devoted fathers to Ethan” says Cruise.

It’s inspiring to see that a traditional Taiwanese culture can embrace the concept of gay parenting, while negative sensationalism perpetuated in the local media can feed intolerance from with Australia’s wider community. While the costs involved in becoming parents reached the $150,000 mark, Rodney and Jeff’s natural paternal instincts will see them extend their family again when the surrogate for their next child is chosen in May.

“The concept of the traditional family is rather outdated,” says Cruise, “the genetic make up of a family is irrelevant to us. We believe a family is about love.”

Known Donor

The flipside to the surrogacy scenario is the known donor situation where a gay male provides the sperm to single lesbian or a lesbian who is partnered. The basis of this arrangement sees the single or coupled lesbians raise the child with any parental rights or responsibility placed on the biological father. Individual arrangements may be made where the father sees the child throughout his or her upbringing, as either an uncle, family friend or even as dad, though the parental rights are reserved exclusively for the lesbian couple. Known donor cases are usually carried without issue as they have taken on a specific role, which takes a step back from the role and responsibilities of raising the child. 39-year-old Allan from Sydney’s inner West is the very proud known donor to nineteen-month-old Zara.

While Allan spends quality time with Zara and enjoys a close friendship with her lesbian parents, he has maintained the agreement, which sees Zara’s mothers as her full time parents. “I’m very close to the girls and Zara and see them every week. My reward for the gift I have given the girls is seeing the immense joy Zara has brought to everyone’s lives, including grandparents,” says Allan.

“I guess I am seen as a satellite figure or even uncle, and that has worked out incredibly well for all of us. All of our friends have been extremely supportive of the situation.” Last month the NSW Government made its long awaited announcement that it would commit to amending laws to give same-sex parents of children conceived through artificial fertilization the right to officially registered the names of both mothers on a child’s birth certificate.

Co-parenting

Sees the single male or gay male couple act as a co-parent, along side a single or couple lesbian. This arrangement may see a child with two mothers and two fathers, which ultimately provides a double dose of devotion and love for the child. “The biggest issue for gay dads in co-parenting is working out a reasonable arrangement with a lesbian couple and maintaining it,” say Gay Dads Australia’s Rodney Cruise. “Often couples may site down prior to the arrangement and figure out who will see the child and when.”

Many Australian children may have four heterosexual parents through divorce and new marriages, the child of four gay parents often grow up with the extended family from birth. Co-parenting may see the child living with either sets of parents on a full or part time basis based upon a mutal agreement between the male and female couples.

Adoption

Adoption ofr gay singles and couples is legal in the United States, United Kingdom, South Africa, Spain, Sweden and the Netherlands, Australia has failed to catch up to speed. In 2007 a WA couple made Australian history by being the first gay couple granted the right to adopt, however since the landmark ruling no other couples have been allowed to follow suit. Though inter-country adoption between Australian and co-adoption countries such as China exist for heterosexuals, the same rights are not currently extended to gay and lesbian singles or couples wanting to adopt.

Previous relationship

Like countless other gay fathers across Australia, 45-year-old Gregory Duffy, from Sydney’s East has enjoyed the riches of fatherhood through children born out of a previous heterosexual relationship. “I was married, in love and ultimately wanted to start a family and have children of my own,” recalls Duffy.

After the birth of his second daughter, Duffy came to terms with his own sexuality. “I came out to myself toward the end of 1993, and left the marriage when my children Victoria and Georgia were five and two-and-a-half years old. All they really knew was that Dad had left but not for a deeper reason. I did not officially come out to my wife till at least 6 months later.”

“Finally, we began to talk about a whole lot of issues we never touched on before.”

Although Duffy did not come out to his eldest daughter Victoria for another seven years, he recalls his eldest girl struggling with the decision more than his youngest.

“Victoria was quite upset and didn’t fully understand what it was for me to be gay, but after numerous long chats she slowly adjusted and actually felt it was quite cool to have a gay dad!”

Today Greg enjoys a wonderful relationship with Victoria, 19 and Georgina, 16. “Having two beautiful daughters that accept me for who I am and have never judged me for being gay has enriched our relationship. It has been an interesting and emotional journey, but to know I have had their love and support has made the road much easier to travel.”

For more information on Gay Dads Australia and advice on surrogacy go to www.gaydadsaustralia.com.

[Link: Original Article]

Relationship and Parent Rights Question & Answer - Jenni Millbank

Jenni Millbank is a Barrister and Professor of Law at the University of Technology, Sydney. Jenni has an extensive background in family law and same-sex relationship recognition.

This is an extract of the advice provided on the GLRL website (www.glrl.org.au)

Please note that this column is information of a general nature only and does not constitute legal advice.
*NEW* Questions Answered this Month:

* Both I and my same-sex partner want to migrate from our home country to Australia. Can we do this together as a couple under the skilled migration program?
* The federal government lacks the constitutional power to introduce civil unions (as the power it is granted in the constitution is over “marriage”, “divorce” and “matrimonial causes”). What are some options available to get around this problem?
* Are fertility clinics in NSW and Qld prohibited from providing access to lesbians?
* Is it possible to become a parent through surrogacy in Australia? What is the law with regards to payment to the surrogate mother by the donors?
* What is the age of consent in NSW?

Previously Answered Questions:

Adoption, Surrogacy and Parenting

* Are agreements between donors and mothers binding?
* What is the legal position of known and anonymous donors?
* Is second parent adoption possible in Australia, ie can a lesbian co-mother adopt children born to her partner?
* Would marriage give the right to adopt? Or would civil unions or de facto status do so?
* What is the legal standing of surrogacy in Australia for gay men wanting to be fathers?

Civil Unions and Marriage

* What federal rights available to married and de facto couples are not available to couples under a state-based civil union?
* Do married couples have more rights than de facto couples at federal level?
* Some people are against marriage because historically marriage treated women as property. Are women disadvantaged in any way in modern day marriage?
* What is the difference between relationship registration and civil unions?
* If I register my relationship in Tasmania or have a civil union in the ACT, will that be recognised in federal law - eg for immigration purposes will I be treated as married rather than as interdependent?

De Facto Relationships

* What relationship rights do I have at the moment?
* How is de facto recognition different from marriage or civil unions?
* I read that the De Facto Relationships Act applies 11 tests to determine the legal validity of a de facto relationship, and that typically gay men can only satisfy 4 of these 11 criteria. Is this so?
* How do I prove I am in a de facto relationship?
* Would federal recognition of same-sex couples as de facto relationships take away any of our current rights at state level?
* Would de facto recognition at federal level allow a government that did not like same-sex relationships to ban same-sex relationship recognition, like the marriage ban?

Protecting your Relationship Rights

* What rights do straight couples have that I don’t have?
* What can I do to get legal rights and protection for my relationship now?
* What is a “domestic relationship agreement”?
* How can I enter into a domestic relationship agreement and how much will it cost?

Sex

* What is the age of consent in NSW?

Superannuation

* How do I prove my relationship for superannuation

To find out the answer to these questions and more, visit the GLRL website at www.glrl.org.au or click here.

SX - "One State, One Mother" by Jenni Millbank

There’s no reason for New South Wales to be dragging the chain in same-sex parenting rights, writes Jenni Millbank.family-250.jpg

The majority of same-sex families in Australia are formed by lesbian couples having children through assisted conception.

In some families this is with anonymous sperm, while in others it is with the help of a known donor or biological father who is often a gay man.

Men in these arrangements occupy a wide variety of roles, from a ‘donor’ with little or no contact with the child, to an on-going relationship that is friendly and may or may not involve him being called ‘Dad’.

Children in all of these families have two mothers but have the protection and security of a legal relationship with only one parent: the birth mother. These children may also be deprived of a legal relationship with their sister or brother. Even if they have the same biological father but are each born to a different mother in the couple, NSW will not record the children as siblings.

A very simple way to solve this situation is to open up the existing presumption of parental status for heterosexual couples and apply it to lesbian couples.

A man who consents to his female partner conceiving through donor insemination or IVF is the legal father of the child regardless of his lack of genetic connection to the child. This presumption, in existence for more than 30 years in Australian law, renders social fathers the legal fathers of children whom they intended to raise.

A sperm donor, whether known or anonymous is (like an egg donor) not a legal parent.

This rule recognises the importance of children having a legally protected relationship with both of the parents who actually live with and care for them, regardless of genetic connection.

Such parents can then make important medical decisions for their children, can travel with them overseas, and can pass on property to them in the absence of a will. Legal recognition also ensures that both parents are equally placed if they later separate and have a dispute.

The biological connection of one parent in these situations should not be used as a weapon to exclude the other.

Providing automatic recognition to the second female parent in lesbian families should not be seen as something that competes with, or detracts from, the rights of a known donor/biological father.

Firstly, known donors are not legal fathers in Australia, so they do not lose any rights by co-mothers gaining parental status.

Secondly, in the vast majority of families, children live with their mothers and some have a contact relationship with their biological father, which does not necessarily require full parental status.

Furthermore, if biological fathers have, or wish to have, relationships with children, the Family Court has attached great importance to both the social relationship and their biological connection with the child, regardless of the lack of legal parental status.

Legal recognition of lesbian co-mothers is not about devaluing the role of involved gay fathers; rather it is about providing a clear legal support for the primary caregiving unit.

In 2002 Western Australia was the first Australian state to extend a presumption of parentage to lesbian partners, followed by the Northern Territory in 2003 and the ACT in 2004. This parental status will be extended to both female parents in Victorian law later in 2008.

Equivalent reforms have also been in place in South Africa since 2003, New Zealand since 2004 and were introduced in most Canadian provinces from 2002-2006.

The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission recommended similar provisions for all federal law in their report into same-sex families last year.

Yet last week the NSW Attorney-General John Hatzistergos announced that NSW will not follow the lead of WA, the ACT, NT and Victoria, and will instead continue to prevent children in lesbian families from having the protection and care of two legal parents.

This stubborn resistance to the tide of change is lamentable: NSW was the first to introduce same-sex couple rights in 1999, don’t let us be the last to pass parenting rights.

Jenni Millbank is a Professor of Law at the University of Technology, Sydney.

[Link: Original Article]

Shepparton News - "Keen to Secure Equal Standing" by Kim Stephens

Rowena Allen and Kaye Bradshaw siad the birth of their daughter Alexandra hammered home the inequality gay and lesbian couples face. Victorian Government MPs are expect to pass a new Bill that will create a relationships register for gay and lsbian couples to officially recognise them as partners.

Part of the new legislation would enable a same sex partner to discuss medical treatment with doctors, something Ms Bradshaw was legally unable to do when Ms Allen underwent an emergency caesarean.

"At this point we have no rights", Ms Allen said.

"Kaye is not formally recognised as here (Alexandra's) parent." The couple were forced to undergo home insemination to conceive Alexandra with access to IVF services only permitted for medical reasons.

"Women are denied access to IVF if the are scoially infertile, i.e. if they don't want to have sex with a man", Ms Bradshaw said.

Ms Bradshaw and Ms Allen said though it needed an "accelerator", there were confident society was steadily progressing and gay couples would on day be recognised as equal to heterosexual couples.

"We hope that by the time Alexandra's at school we will be formally married, " Ms Allen said.

Shepparton News - "A Rainbow Family" by Kim Stephens

Lesbian Mums Welcome Little Bundle of Joy with Open Arms

Violet town couple Rowena Allen and Kaye Bradshaw joke their baby daughter Alexandra will probably one day nervously come to them to say she likes boys.

"Statistically, the odds are she will be heterosexual," Ms Allen said yesterday.

"But we'll still love her anyway," Ms Bradshaw finished.

The Lesbian couple's leap-day baby is a special bundle of joy for more than just her February 29 birth date.

While gay families such as theirs are increasingly common and readily accepted in urban settings, in more conservative country settings the concept remains relatively rare.

"We knew we were going to be trailblazers," Ms Allen, who gave birth to ALexandra, said.

"We thought about doing it in Melbourne but we really wanted to have here in our community."

Alexandra was born at Goulburn valley Base Hospital, capping off what Ms Allen jokingly described as "a bizarre rainbow family".

Ms Bradshaw has two sons, aged 19 and 20, while Alexandra's father - the couple's gay Melbourne friend Ian Seal - also has two sons of similar ages, all of whom have been thrilled by the latest addition to their families.

"They have all said she will be very well protected if anything should happen when she gets to school," Ms Bradshaw said.

Ms Bradshaw, 46, and Ms Allen, 35, also agreed Mr Seal would continue to play a pivotal role in his daughter's life and would always be "dad" to her.

They both said they were fully aware fo the reaction bringing Alexandra into their family could evoke in their rural setting.

"It's not so much out-right hostility we face, it's the invisibility," Ms Allen said.

"People don't assume we're partners and we fight a constant battle to explain it.

"It's a constant reminder you don't fit the system".

But they said they had been overwhelmed by the support of neighbours and friends, both throughout the pregnacy and since Alexandra was born.

"Violet Town is pretty progressive and the community have embraced us and really accepted us," Ms Allen said.

As for the future impact on Alexandra, the couple firmly believed the very much planned for baby girl would be as well adjusted as any child from a loving home.

"There are such a diverse range of families now, society really needs to start fully accepting that," Ms Allen said.

"There is absolutely no accident here, she's been brought into a large family who all really love her.
"

"I think she'll be extremely open to diversity".

Who Magazine - "Not Your Average Family" by Michael Crooks & Emma Dimwiddie

Two same-sex couples share the joy and challenges of parenthood.

Whenever their eyes settle on their little girl, Kirk and Rob Marcolina's faces beam. Although Sophie is already 20 months old, her two dads are still overwhelmed with having a daughter and relishing their role as fathers. "The most rewarding things are seeing here take her first step, say her first word or give you her first kiss," says Rob, 37, in the couple's Rose Bay, Sydney, home. "It is so much fun to watch her grow and learn about the world."

That they treasure such moments isn't surprising. To have Sophie - Kirk's biological child - has been a lengthy, often complicated, process for the couple. Indeed, for any gay or lesbian couple desiring children of their own, the journey can be costly and often relies on the goodwill of others, including sperm and egg donors and surrogate mothers. Then, once they become parents, homosexuals don't have the same rights and privileges as heterosexual couples - a hot issue during the federal election campaign. (In June, WA became the first Australian state to allow a gay couple to adopt a child.) Indeed, it's not easy, says Kirk, 37, "for a gay couple to have a child."

Not that they were ever deterred. Kirk and Rob's plant to start a family was on the agenda from the moment they met as neighbours in Los Angeles in 2001. "One of the things that attracted us to each other was the fact we both wanted to have kdis one day," says Kirk, a stay-at-home dad and former TV producer from Philadelphia. He and Melbourne-born Rob, who was working in Los Angeles when they met, married legally in Canada in 2003 and set about starting a family. "It was a question of how," says Rob, now a management consultant in Sydney for a US-Based company.

They decided on the surrogacy route, and Rob's sister, Kym, a Melbourne mother of two, volunteered to donate an egg. Kirk would provide the sperm for the in-vitro fertilisation treatment. "Kym knew how important it was for me to have a child," says Rob, who proudly points out that Sophie has a resemblance to his side of the family. Adds Kirk: "It was an amazing gift to us." The next challenge was finding a gestational surrogate (a "traditional" surrogate involves the woman's own egg). While paid surrogacy is illegal in Australia, in the US there are agencies that cate for gay and lesbian couples. Through the Los Angeles agency Growing Generations, Rob and Kirk were put in touch with Sonia, who was implatnted with the fertilised egg (the couple preferred not to disclose what the surrogacy cost, but the price can range from $US115,000 to $US150,000). "We had full involvement during the pregnancy," says Rob, "and we were at the birth, which was a wonderful experience. When Sophie was born, the doctor handed Sophie to Kirk and I got to cut the cord."

Being a two-dad family might be different - "At some of the playgroups, you definitely sick out," says Kirk - but the couple haven't yet faced any social hurdles. "People are curious because it's not your average family." says Kirk. "But everyone has been very positive."

Sydney couple Kendi and Leigh Burness-Cowan have also had a favourable experience in raising their two children. "I don't feel there is any difference really between us and other couples with children." says 32-year old Kendi, a Sydney communications officer who gay birth to both the couple's children, Hunter, 3, and Hugo, 7 months (the couple use a sperm donor found through a personal ad). "A few people took a while to warm to the idea, but nobody has said anything negative."

Where problems can arise is in the rights of the parents. THe Burness-Cowans and the Marcolinas "are not legally recognised as couples," says human-rights commissioner Graeme Innes. "It can have an impact in terms of access to the Medicare safety net, access to various tax provisions and access to leave which might relate to looking after a sick child."

For Kendi, this hasn't posed a problem, "apart from crossing out lots of "father' columns on various forms," she says. "Where it would be an issue would be if the parents separated and there were custody issues, although the courts consider a child's 'best interest.'" And Rob and Kirk say they simply want more acceptance of gay and lesbian families in Australia. "A lot of people say gay people shouldn't be parents," says Rob. "What I'd like to say is that when a gay person has a family, they really want that child - they're the most wanted kids, in a way Sophie has the love of two dads, two loving parents, which is all you can really ask for."

Herald Sun - " Homosexual mum and dad go to court" by Craig Binnie

A LESBIAN mother is battling to stop the gay father of her child from having his homosexual lover declared one of the child's parents.

The Family Court heard this week the mother had been in a relationship with another woman for about 10 years when she asked a gay friend to impregnate her.

The court heard that even though the child's mother and father lived apart they agreed they would both have a role in the child's upbringing.

The mother, however, is fighting attempts by the father to have the court recognise his gay lover as the child's second father.

The court heard allegations that the child's father was involved in sadomachistic sex and bondage, had an interest in child porn and possessed a magazine containing an article about a father who had sex with his son.

The man denies the claims, which were made by one of his former lovers.

The mother's lawyer told the court the boy would automatically spend time with his father's lover when he had access to the child and that there was no need to have him formally noted as a co-parent.

She said the father's lover was acting out a political agenda by trying to have authorities officially recognise him.

The court was told the father wanted the child to have two fathers and two mothers.

The court was told the only difference to an normal separated couple with new partners would be that the fathers were a couple and the mothers were a couple.

A lawyer appointed by the court to act on behalf of the child told the court the father and his lover had a stable relationship.

He said the child was progressing and developing well and there was no evidence of abuse having taken place.

Whether the father's lover will succeed in being named as a co-parent will be decided at a trial in November.

[Link: Original Article]

The Age - "Rainbow Children" by Peter Munro

When a daddy and a daddy love each other very much ... More gays and lesbians are becoming parents, despite the obstacles in their way. Peter Munro reports.

NEXT month Rodney Cruise will become a father for the second time without having had sex with a woman. By then, it will be nine months since his first child, Ethan, was born to a surrogate in the United States, and Cruise and partner Jeff Chiang together cut the umbilical cord. They flew home to Melbourne as a family when Ethan was 11 days old, and three days later Cruise successfully donated his sperm to a lesbian couple who are close friends of theirs and who are now expecting their first child in four weeks.

Cruise, 41, a patent attorney, came out as gay when he was 13, but it is his new role as a father that attracts attention. "We both wanted to be parents and didn't see our sexuality as being a bar to that; it just complicated things," he says.

They used a surrogacy agency in California at a total cost of about $150,000, including flights and accommodation and $35,000 for their surrogate Kelly, from Ohio. They plan to return to the US before Christmas to conceive another child by surrogacy.

That child will be Cruise's third, one of a growing number of babies born of gay and lesbian parents. Victorian families with same-sex de facto partners and at least one child aged 18 or under grew by more than a third in the five years to the 2006 census. Across Australia, there were almost 2400 families with at least one gay or lesbian parent, a jump of about 26 per cent.

If anything, these figures grossly underestimate actual numbers of gay and lesbian families, many of which are not comfortable publicly divulging details of their sexuality. But they offer a good guide to the increasingly pink face of Australian families. The most startling jump in Victoria was in gay families with preschool children, with the number of declared same-sex families with children aged four or under more than doubling to 167.

Dr John McBain, director of Melbourne IVF and head of reproductive services at Royal Women's Hospital, says there is a growing acceptance of same-sex families in the wider community. "I think the public is much more tolerant now of lesbian couples becoming parents," he says. "People are far more aware that lesbian couples are loving couples in relationships as stable as heterosexual ones and that they make good parents."

Shifting public perceptions have also favoured single women wanting to start a family. Surveys show that from 1993 to 2000, the number of people who approved of the use of donor sperm to help single women conceive more than doubled to 38 per cent. Almost a third supported the use of donor sperm by gay couples, compared with only 7 per cent in 1993.

Both groups of women have sought to start families through the Royal Women's sperm storage bank, where sperm from known donors is screened for communicable diseases and frozen before it is available for self-insemination. Three months ago, the screening facility celebrated its first birth from one of the 15 women to have used the service, McBain says.

Seven years ago, McBain successfully challenged Victoria's infertility laws on behalf of a 38-year-old animal shelter worker from Box Hill South, who had tried for eight years to conceive but was refused donor sperm because she was single. The 2000 Federal Court decision, upheld on appeal to the High Court, stripped out the requirement that women must be either married or in a solid de facto relationship to access assisted reproductive technology.

But such treatment is still limited in Victoria and South Australia, alone among the states and territories, to women who are medically infertile — effectively barring both lesbian and single women who function fine but don't plan to test out their fertility with the opposite sex.

Lori, 34, and Libby, 32, a lesbian couple in western Victoria, are among a growing number of women who have had to cross the border to make a baby. In November, they will travel to Albury for their second shot at donor insemination for Libby, a horse midwife, at a clinic that is so busy it has closed its waiting list. Each attempt costs about $1500, not including the cost and inconvenience of having to stay interstate for several nights.

Lori, a part-time teacher at a Catholic primary school, who prefers not to reveal her surname, has a 10-year-old daughter from a former heterosexual relationship. She says that gays and lesbians, like the wider community, have become more accepting of parenthood.

"When I came out eight, nine years ago, there wasn't a lot of support for lesbian mums. It was more like, 'Why would you have a kid when you are gay?' And I found it really hard to fight against that stereotype," she says. "Now there are a lot more women who are saying that in a few years' time they would like to have a kid."

The couple have also advertised online for a donor, who they want to play an "uncle" role with limited contact, on Maybe Baby, one of several social groups for "rainbow families" — a mixture of homosexuals, heterosexuals, bisexuals and transgenders. They have had responses from a gay male who has previously donated sperm to two lesbian couples and a heterosexual man who says he would like to help.

They are not alone in pursuing parenthood online. On one website, a 30-something, non-smoking gay couple want to be co-parents and a 31-year-old lesbian with a nine-year-old son is on the lookout for a donor who is extremely fit, healthy and handsome. A gay couple in Perth want a woman to carry their child. And on the Queensland coast, a male bisexual wants to assist a single woman or lesbian couple, promising to help pay for the child's rearing.

Other websites include forums with hints on DIY insemination, including the tip that women should avoid hot baths before and after they insert the syringe, and another on what name children should call their gay parents — Mum and Mumma? Dad and Pop?

The Rainbow Families Council, which was established last September, gives gay and lesbian parents the chance to meet offline as well. Felicity Marlowe, who co-ordinates the council's Love Makes a Family campaign for legal reform, says the growing visibility of same-sex parents has made more gays and lesbians consider having their own children. "Sometimes you think every second person who is queer is having a child," she says.

"We are seeing lots more requests from child-care centres and primary schools to look at how they can become more inclusive in their policies and their curriculum, because they are seeing more families with two mums or two dads."

Schools in Melbourne's inner northern suburbs are particularly inclusive of the children of gay and lesbian families, she says. That might mean simply stocking library books that include same-sex parents among their characters or amending standard letters home to refer to parent/parent rather than mother/father.

It is a long way from the day in 2004 when then acting Prime Minister John Anderson publicly criticised the ABC for a Play School episode showing a young child visiting the zoo with her two mums. The Federal Government is yet to change its tune, with Prime Minister John Howard maintaining this year that having a mother and a father gave children "the best opportunity in life".

Some sectors of the Australian public also maintain that children need a mother and father, preferably married. A spokeswoman for the Australian Family Association says: "Children need an involved, on the ground, in the house, father and mother. They don't need other mothers, adopted mothers or other fathers."

DISCRIMINATION was among the topics discussed at a symposium on same-sex parents for medical practitioners, healthcare workers and researchers at the University of Melbourne in June.

Dr Ruth McNair, a general practitioner specialising in lesbian and women's health and a senior lecturer in the department of general practice at the university, says prejudice remains a potent issue for many same-sex parents. Men in particular face some opposition both from among the general public and from within the gay community, where they might be tagged with the derogatory term "breeders".

"They are often faced with comments that lesbians would have got 20 years ago," McNair says. "Comments like, 'Why are you selling out to the mainstream, why don't you just continue the gay lifestyle'."

Such catcalls are gradually fading, though, says McNair, who is on maternity leave with her four-month-old son, Samuel, whom she parents with her lesbian partner. "There has been a huge change in the community in the past 20 years. If you look at the (Sydney) Gay & Lesbian Mardi Gras, the first group are always the Dykes on Bikes, but the second group is now mums with prams."

In one sense, the debate has moved on, from discussions on the concept of gay and lesbian parents to a focus on their children as they grow older. A US study last year found that the adolescent offspring of same-sex parents did not differ from the children of heterosexual couplings in self-esteem, peer relationships, school adjustment, drug use or sexual experience. The only significant difference was that the teenagers of same-sex parents coped better with prejudice and bullying.

But in another sense, the debate has stayed the same. The Australian Family Association still argues that "there is bucketloads of research" showing that children need a mother and father.

This is despite the findings of the Victorian Law Reform Commission's final report into assisted reproductive technology and adoption, which was tabled in Parliament in June. The commission made 130 recommendations for updating Victoria's infertility laws, including that people seeking to undergo treatment or to adopt must not be discriminated against on the basis of their sexual orientation or be excluded on the grounds that they have no partner.

The commission also recommended that Victoria scrap its "clinical infertility" bar to treatment in favour of a simple test of whether a woman, in her circumstances, is unlikely to become pregnant by any other means. Attorney-General Rob Hulls, who has sat on the report for several months, has promised to respond before the end of the year.

Cruise and Chiang first told the story of Ethan's birth to The Age in April and on the same day they were stopped in the street by a woman who thanked them for showing that her own gay son might one day give her a grandchild. "When I was young, I always wanted to be a parent but I couldn't see how it could happen. Now there is a sense within the gay community than we can have it too and why should we be denied it," Cruise says.

"Most parents want to be grandparents one day and we look forward to the day when Ethan, whether gay or straight, becomes a dad as well."


[Link: Original Article]

The Age - "The Gay Couple"

SARAH Marlowe gave birth to twins Callum and Rafi almost a year ago. Being clinically infertile, she was legally able to use IVF in Victoria.

Now her partner Felicity wants to have a baby. But the "problem" is that Felicity does not have a fertility problem,

which means she cannot legally access these services in this state.

Instead of going to the expense of travelling to a more permissive state, Felicity intends to use the sperm of a known donor and inseminate herself at home.

It's not ideal, and she would prefer to be inseminated by a doctor at a clinic. The couple see a clinic as her best chance of getting pregnant, but legally she can't do that unless the Government adopts the Victorian Law Reform Commission's recommendations.

The pair say a bigger problem is the lack of legal recognition for Felicity as the twins' legal parent. Under current laws only the biological mother can be on the birth certificate.

They welcomed yesterday's recommendations giving both parents legal recognition. Felicity, speaking on behalf of the Rainbow Families Council, said the report reflected the reality

of diverse families. "At the moment it's still in the climate of uncertainty and we'd love there to be some legal certainty as soon as possible."

[Link: Original Article]

Northcote Leader - "Gay parents' parity plea"

LESBIANS across Darebin have made a desperate plea for the legal recognition of non-biological parents .

Their personal stories are included in a Victorian Law Reform Commission submission made to Attorney-General Rob Hulls last month.

Mr Hulls has until June 20 to table the report on Assisted Reproductive Technology and Adoption.

In its draft submissions, the commission recommends that the law be changed to recognise the birth mother's female partner as a parent of the child. It also recommends same-sex couples have equal access to the technology and be legally entitled to engage surrogate mothers.

Women's Health in the North deputy chair Susan Rennie said the organisation broadly supported the interim recommendations.

``Law reform will be beneficial to children born in these (same-sex) relationships because it will mean, at least from a legal point of view, that their families will cease to be considered differently to other families in the community,'' she said.

Ms Rennie, a lesbian in a relationship with two children, said women did not seek medical help for fear of breaking the laws.

``If a woman thinks she is breaking the law by self-inseminating she might not consult her doctor and may be less inclined to ask a donor to undertake appropriate medical tests,'' she said.

Preston couple Felicity and Sarah Marlowe were so concerned by the implication of the law that they started a lobby group, Love Makes a Family, in 2004.

``We started a campaign to mobilise the community around law reform; seeking legal and social recognition of rainbow families,'' Felicity said.

They now have 170 members on their email list and have made a formal submission to the commission also broadly supporting the recommendations.

Other locals who made submissions include Northcote couple Vivien Ray and Robin Gregory; parents of a teenage daughter conceived by donor insemination.

``It would make a great difference to us if the non-biological parent could do a second parent adoption,'' they said. ``It would be such a relief after all these years to be legally recognised.''

Preston's Sabdha Charlton says her partner Cristina Pink is six months pregnant with their first child. They feel strongly that the law should not differentiate between hetero and homosexual couples.

* Should same-sex couples be given the same legal rights as hetero couples? Write to the editor at www.northcoteleader.com.au

The Age - "Making babies for all" by Carol Nadar

TO MAKE their first baby, Anna Russell and Sacha Petersen drove 3½ hours to cross the NSW border to Albury. Petersen lay on a table, and a nurse inseminated her with a donor's sperm. Ten minutes later, what the couple call the "spermination" was complete. Blue-eyed baby Mabel was born 17 months ago.

Now Russell and Petersen are trying for a second child. The first donor is unavailable and the Albury clinic — traditionally the place where Victorian lesbians and single women go for fertility treatment — has all but run out of sperm donors. So the couple have shifted their hopes to Tasmania. Each month they fly to Launceston and leave Mabel with family there. Then they drive to Hobart, where Petersen receives treatment. They drive back to Launceston, pick up Mabel, and fly back to Melbourne. The couple have gone through this ritual five times, costing them about $5000 in airfares and treatment. But Petersen hasn't fallen pregnant.

If their sixth attempt in May fails, Petersen can be declared "medically infertile" — that means that under Victoria's labyrinthine laws governing reproductive treatment, she can receive IVF treatment in her own state for the first time.

"There's no logic behind it that we can see," Russell says. "The Federal Government is handing out money for straight people to have babies left, right and centre. The famous quote (by Treasurer Peter Costello) 'one for you, one for your partner, and one for Australia'. You have a whole community wanting to do that."

There is another anomaly. Victorian reproductive laws are the most restrictive in the country mainly because it was the most progressive state for infertility treatment in the early years. Victoria was one of the first places in the world to offer IVF, in which embryos are created using a woman's eggs and a man's sperm then implanted into the woman. It was the first Australian state to legislate in 1984 when IVF was so new and so controversial that it was strictly controlled. The sole purpose of IVF then was to help infertile married couples have biological children.

The medical technology has always bumped up against community unease. Even de facto heterosexual couples were banned from using it until a decade ago and, although attitudes towards lesbians and single women having children have changed dramatically in a generation, such people remain excluded unless they are clinically infertile.

Soon, that might change. The Victorian Law Reform Commission has spent more than four years reviewing the state's fertility legislation. Yesterday, it handed its final report to Attorney-General Rob Hulls, and its recommendations will be made public in coming weeks. In a draft report released in 2005, the commission indicated it would recommend that lesbian couples and single women be given the same access to fertility treatment as women in heterosexual relationships. That would have been unthinkable 20 years ago, when the notion of "social infertility" was unheard of.

Despite the rapidly changing definition of "family", the debate about whether Victoria should, like most other states, make it easier for single women and lesbians to have children is likely to be emotional and intense. In a sign of the discomfort the issue arouses, the Bracks Government has so far avoided making its position clear.

What is clear is that the impact of the restrictions has been profound for Victorian women desperate for a child who have been forced to travel around the country for treatment. The phenomenon even has a name — "reproductive tourism". Last year, the Albury clinic treated 44 women, of whom 30 were from Victoria. Thirteen were lesbians, 19 were single and eight were married. Victorian women also travel regularly to Canberra, Sydney, Hobart and Brisbane.

Those wanting change see the law as a mishmash of contradictions. For instance, for lesbians and single women, infertility can be a cause for celebration — they can have IVF treatment in Victoria. But fertile single women or lesbians, who do not have a male partner or who are unwilling to sleep with a man solely for the purpose of becoming pregnant, do not have access to reproductive help.

The anomaly is due to a court case six years ago. A single woman who could not conceive for medical reasons, Leesa Meldrum, and her doctor, Melbourne IVF director Dr John McBain, tested a ban on single women using IVF in the Federal Court. The court upheld their argument that state legislation contravened the federal Sex Discrimination Act. Since then, women can no longer be excluded based on marital status. But they still need to meet the requirement of infertility.

So women who are fertile have to be creative. They either ask a friend to provide the sperm and inseminate themselves at home, a practice some worry is unsafe. Or they travel interstate.

In the aftermath of the McBain case, Hulls asked the Law Reform Commission in 2002 to review the legislation. Its interim recommendations urged the Government to remove the infertility requirement and allow access for women who are "unlikely" to become pregnant without treatment. That would cover all women without a male partner.

The commission argued the law was unfair because it was applied unevenly — a single woman with a genetic abnormality that could be passed onto her child is eligible for treatment. A single woman of 45 may be eligible for treatment because her age has made her clinically infertile. But a single woman aged 35 who does not have clinical infertility cannot be treated. These distinctions, the report noted, "make no sense". Nor did it believe that the marital status of a child's parents was linked to the child's health and welfare.

One heterosexual woman who spoke to The Age first explored the idea of having a baby when she was 40 but was ineligible because she was single. She is now 43 and pregnant, but only because tests proved she was medically infertile. Instead of celebrating her pregnancy, she lives in fear that she is going to have another miscarriage — her first pregnancy ended in miscarriage late last year. "I've been waiting for this all my life and then it's not the journey it should have been," she says. "I want to celebrate it, but you're scared all the time. Your chances of doing it earlier are easier. You shouldn't have to wait until you're infertile and you have 50 million obstacles in front of you."

There are other quirks caused by galloping technology. If a woman can find her own sperm donor, the Melbourne IVF clinic will screen and store the sperm for six months to make sure it is safe. She can then take it home and inseminate herself. The clinic can do all the tests but not the insemination. The aim is to reduce a woman's vulnerability to HIV.

Alice Murray and her partner are trying to have a baby using this program. "Both my partner and I work full time and going to Sydney when you're ovulating, which might be mid-week, is impractical from a work perspective," she says. "If you're working in a professional environment you can't just drop everything and leave."

The law may change to allow women to be inseminated in a clinic. But even if they could, some women might still choose to do it at home.

Dr Ruth McNair, a Melbourne University senior lecturer in general practice and a GP who specialises in gay and lesbian health, believes self-insemination is relatively safe. She says some women prefer the autonomy of doing it themselves. And some like the idea of giving gay men the opportunity of being parents, too. But if it isn't clear where they all stand — or if feelings change after the birth — it can lead to problems later.

"The most fraught part of it is the medical risk of transmitting infection, and secondly the legal risk if they haven't managed to make an adequate written negotiated contract," McNair says.

Dr Deb Dempsey, a lecturer in sociology at Swinburne University, says the law needs to catch up with the complexity of people's relationships. "Children deserve to be well supported and have legal recognition for the people that are actually parenting them," she says.

Opponents of lesbians and single women having access to IVF argue that children are better off being part of a traditional family. In the storm following the McBain case, Prime Minister John Howard said: "Children are entitled to the opportunity of both a mother and a father." His views were echoed by State Opposition Leader Ted Baillieu, who said in the lead-up to the November state election: "My view is that IVF ought to be for heterosexual couples."

When the Law Reform Commission released its interim report, Health Minister Tony Abbott blasted its "apparent dismissal of the traditional notion that children should ideally have male and female parents".

Australian Family Association spokeswoman Angela Conway says the priority should be the rights of the child. "Children do best in the context of family life, where their natural mother and father are involved in their day-to-day life and upbringing as their recognised parents, and preferably where that natural mother and father are married," she says.

But the Law Reform Commission has reviewed the literature and does not believe this is the case. It says there is sound evidence that children born into families with non-biological parents or same-sex parents do at least as well as other children.

According to social researchers, there is scant evidence that children who are not raised by a father and mother in a traditional way are worse off than children who are.

Sarah Wise, the principal research fellow in children and parenting at the Australian Institute of Family Studies, says the research, predominantly from the United States, does not suggest that children's wellbeing is at risk. Whether they're raised by one parent or two, a heterosexual couple or a gay one, is less important than the quality of care," she says.

"What matters most to children is the environment in which they grow up, the quality of the interactions they have with their care-givers and the security that they feel within those relationships."

What may be harmful to children is the lack of legal recognition given to the non-birth mother in a lesbian relationship. The non-biological, or "social" mother, does not have the right to be on the child's birth certificate and is not recognised as the legal parent in Victoria.

However, in another anomaly, if a heterosexual couple uses donor sperm to have a child, the woman's male partner is on the birth certificate.

The Law Reform Commission has suggested the non-birth mother deserves legal recognition and should appear on the birth certificate alongside the birth mother. Acting chairman Dr Iain Ross says if the birth mother dies , there is legal ambiguity about the rights and obligations of the surviving partner and it would be possible that the child could become a ward of the state. Then there are issues to do with inheritance and being able to consent to medical treatment and sign school forms.

"At worst, you've got a position where someone who was for all intents and purposes the parent of the children does not have any legal rights," Ross says. "They're not recognised as the parent and would have to seek some sort of legal intervention."

Robyn Hamilton and Helen Grutzner want this legal recognition. They have a four-year-old daughter, Harper, who was conceived in a Sydney clinic. They believe the non-birth mother, Hamilton, should automatically be considered a legal parent from birth. Their only recourse was to go to the Family Court to get a parenting order that gives her limited recognition of responsibility but doesn't give her legal status as a parent.

Anyone can apply for such an order — a grandparent, relative, even a friend. The order enables non-biological mothers to make some day-to-day decisions. But if anything were to happen to Grutzner, Hamilton would not necessarily get custody of Harper. That would depend on the good will of the court.

"It has an undermining impact on us as a family, in that we don't have that legal recognition and protection that other families do," says Grutzner.

Felicity and Sarah Marlowe are in a similar position, although they have not yet applied for a parenting order. Sarah Marlowe is medically infertile and can legally have IVF in Victoria. Her partner can't. Marlowe had twins Callum and Rafi, who are nine months old. As the birth mother, only her name is on the birth certificates. Even though the couple went through the process of having children together, Felicity Marlowe has no legal rights. She could walk away from the relationship and not be obligated to pay child support. If Sarah Marlowe ended the relationship, her partner may never see the twins again.

Meanwhile, for the women who are still trying to have a baby, the frustration and sense of grievance lingers. "We have a good house in the suburbs," says Alice Murray.

"We can afford to send our kids to good schools, we earn good money, we're in the best position to be parents, we want it more than a lot of people and there are roadblocks in the way."

Anna Russell and Sacha Petersen are creating story books for their children to explain how they were conceived. They've made one for Mabel, detailing how the couple met, fell in love and knew they wanted to have babies together.

But, the story goes, to have babies, you need an egg and sperm — but "mum" and "muma" are both girls who only have eggs. So they got into their little blue car and drove to a place called Albury, where a kind man supplied the sperm.

Mabel will know her story from the start. But more importantly, says Russell: "Our children will know that they're the most wanted children, because we had to go all over Australia to create them."

Carol Nader is The Age health editor.


[Link: Original Article]

Family Court of Australia - R & J and Anor [2006] FamCA 1398

FAMILY LAW - CHILDREN - Application by father as donor for contact to child born of artificial insemination - Child living with mother and co- parent in same-sex union - Bitterly contested applications resolved with defining of "family" and role of the donor in these circumstances - Observations made concerning status of known sperm donor and impact upon children of enduring conflict between parents - Order for costs in favour of the Independent Children's Lawyer refused.

[Link: Court Decision]

The Age - "Our state's moral sidestep" by Carol Nadar

IN THE old city watchhouse, a group of people converged one night last month to talk about abortion. Invitations went out to every member of State Parliament. Some did not respond. Some sent excuses. Only one turned up.

The forum was organised by Reproductive Choice Australia, a group lobbying the political parties to decriminalise abortion. The trouble is that right now in Victoria, two weeks away from an election, politicians don't much want to talk about tricky, sensitive issues such as abortion.

Apart from two Greens candidates, the one sitting member of Parliament who did attend was retiring Labor MP Carolyn Hirsh — who only months ago was considering moving a private member's bill to remove abortion from the Crimes Act. Her attempts were soon shut down by Premier Steve Bracks' spin doctors.

Abortion is just one of the moral issues that politicians have been avoiding, and that Bracks has deferred making decisions on, in the lead-up to the election.

Bracks and Opposition Leader Ted Baillieu have told voters what they intend to do about stamp duty, hospitals, schools and transport. But when Victorians cast their vote on November 25, they will be uncertain about whether a Bracks or Baillieu government would decriminalise abortion, make IVF available to single women and lesbians or remove the barriers that make surrogacy virtually impossible in this state. The Greens are the only party willing to show their hand on abortion, declaring it should be decriminalised.

While Victoria has been leading the push in some ethically fraught areas such as stem cell research, it remains one of the most conservative states when it comes to regulation of women's reproductivity. Despite being widely available, abortion remains technically part of the Crimes Act — even though the state Labor Party has decriminalisation as part of its policy platform. And when it comes to issues such as IVF and, recently and publicly, surrogacy, Victoria is far behind NSW.

Lesbians for years have been crossing the border to Albury to fulfil their dream of having a baby. And this week, Labor senator Stephen Conroy revealed that he and his wife, who could not conceive naturally, had left their home state of Victoria to organise for a friend to be their surrogate. The baby was conceived using Conroy's sperm and another woman's eggs and the resulting embryo was implanted into the surrogate.

Surrogacy can help women who have a damaged uterus or can't manage a pregnancy for health reasons. But in Victoria, the law makes it so difficult as to be nearly impossible for couples to enter surrogacy arrangements. Victorian law requires the surrogate herself to be infertile. NSW has no such restrictions.

Many gay Australian men now head to the US, where surrogacy is big business, spending sometimes tens of thousands of dollars to produce a baby.

State Opposition Leader Ted Baillieu this week called for a uniform national approach to surrogacy laws, and said the "state hopping" needed to end. Bracks — along with Health Minister Bronwyn Pike and Opposition health spokeswoman Helen Shardey — will only say he is waiting for a final report by the Victorian Law Reform Commission, which is investigating the issue. The commission has already released draft recommendations describing the law as "irrational" and urging the Government to clarify it. It is not due to table its final report in Parliament until early next year.

The commission has also released a draft report on access to IVF, recommending that single women and lesbians should be granted access to fertility treatment, regardless of whether or not they are medically infertile. Victorian laws now restrict most fertile women from this treatment. While Pike says, rather vaguely, that she is in favour of "equal opportunity legislation", the Government has repeatedly refused to comment on IVF access, again using the final report's completion as an excuse.

Baillieu says he believes IVF should be solely between a man and a woman, although he hasn't said whether those views would hinder a debate on the issue if he were premier.

Victoria was one of the first places in the world to introduce IVF technology and was quick to legislate. As a result though, regulation in Victoria is more restrictive than in other jurisdictions such as NSW and the ACT.

Monash University senior lecture in politics Nick Economou does not believe moral issues are a vote swinger. They're issues that tend to be of concern to a small but noisy minority.

"State politics revolves around financial management, major programs, infrastructure. This stuff about morality politics is the preoccupation of the people actually getting into Parliament.

"This is not a matter that so much has the potential to cause big problems in the electorate," he says. "It's something that has the potential to cause big problems in the major parties."

When Pike, who is pro-choice, controversially decided to impose 48-hour cooling-off periods for women seeking late-term abortions last year, the backlash from pro-choice politicians within her own party was swift and fierce. Women in her own party openly criticised her. She was quickly forced to retreat. No one within Labor would want to make a similar mistake now.

"There is great potential for these sorts of morality issues to divide parliamentary parties," Economou says. "You don't have to have a large number of people prepared to depart from their colleagues to cause a problem. This is the reason why we're seeing an increase in conscience voting in the Federal Parliament, because (Prime Minister John) Howard has exactly the same problem. His party has a division between hardline social conservatives and small "l" liberals."

But whether politicians like it or not, these ethically fraught issues won't go away. The fact that there have been two conscience votes in Federal Parliament this year — on the abortion drug RU486 and stem cells — demonstrates that.

Many quietly suspect that Bracks will allow a conscience vote on decriminalising abortion after November 25, although he hasn't said this.

Medical ethicist Leslie Cannold, a member of Reproductive Choice Australia, believes that by not telling people what his intentions are, Bracks is going for the lowest risk option. As she puts it, he is essentially saying, "Don't worry your pretty little head about it."

Economou says if Bracks and Baillieu make it clear where they stand on issues, it would strengthen their position if they end up governing. "Sometimes the government hand is made stronger in policy debates if they raise issues in an election campaign and then they can claim a mandate for them," he says.

When ACT politician Wayne Berry flagged his intention during an election campaign to put up a private member's bill in the territory to decriminalise abortion in 2001, he found it actually helped him get re-elected. Despite being targeted by the right-to-life lobby, he says he earned the respect of his constituents by telling them what his plans were. "Overwhelmingly, my experience has been that people in the community oppose criminal sanctions for abortion," he says. His bill passed in 2002.

The ACT remains the only region where abortion has been fully decriminalised, although each state has provisions for the procedure to be performed if the mother's mental or physical health is at risk.

Carolyn Hirsh is still hopeful that what she started might be accomplished. "I'm hoping that both parties after the election will act on these very important issues."

In Victoria, the Government has managed, if anything, to unite the warring parties in the abortion debate in their frustration at its non-stance. "If they were proud of what their intentions were, they would tell us," says Denise Cameron, president of Pro-Life Victoria, a member of the Coalition Against the Decriminalisation of Abortion. "Why the reticence? Why the coyness?"

The pro-life lobby have been taking their anti-decriminalisation message to the steps of Parliament, dropping leaflets in letterboxes in several electorates — including those of Bracks and Attorney-General Rob Hulls — and taking out huge advertisements in newspapers.

Leslie Cannold says she just wants the parties to be frank about what they are offering.

"The question is not how do you personally feel in your heart of hearts. The question is if you have power, what would you do on this issue?" she says. "That's what I think voters are entitled to know, on the abortion issue and on every issue."
ABORTION: THE LAWS

VICTORIA Can be done under Menhennitt ruling if risk to woman's physical or mental health.

ACT In the Health Act, cooling off period 72 hours after counselling.

NSW Lawful if there is danger to a woman's physical or mental health.

QLD Lawful if for the preservation of the woman's life.

SA Must be approved by two doctors, unless it is necessary for woman's health or to save her life.

WA Doctor can be guilty of an offence unless abortion is performed in good faith and with reasonable care and justified so that woman has freely given informed consent or has social, personal or medical reasons.

NT Up to 14 weeks permitted on grounds of maternal health or foetal disability.

TASMANIA Two doctors must certify that the pregnancy would risk the woman's health.

SOURCE: ABORTION AND THE LAW IN AUSTRALIA,

AUSTRALIAN FAMILY PHYSICIAN, NOVEMBER 2006

Carol Nader is The Age's health reporter.


[Link: Original Article]