Archive for the ‘same sex parenting’ Category
Monday, April 29th, 2013
Natalie and Richard were at the G3 awards on Friday night, a gala evening hosted by Charlie Condou and Sophie Ward, celebrating leading figures and influencers in the LGBT world.
NGA was proud to be nominated for not just one but two of the prestigious awards – Family Provider of the Year, and Diversity Champion of the Year – at an event attended by guests including Stephen Fry, Clare Balding, Peter Tatchell and Ben Summerskill.
Here’s what G3 said about us:
Natalie Gamble Associates is known for its pioneering work pushing the boundaries of the law for same sex parents. The team has helped thousands of alternative families, including acting in the groundbreaking cases which have made UK law on donor conception and international surrogacy. NGA campaigns on behalf of alternative families, successfully defending the right for same sex parents to be named on birth certificates together back in 2008, and recently winning a long campaign to give gay dads through surrogacy equal maternity leave rights.
Find out more about our work with same sex parents or about our team, or contact us for help or advice.
Tags: 26 April 2013, Diversity Champion, Family provider, G3 awards, Natalie Gamble, Natalie Gamble Associates, Out in the City awards, Richard Perrins
Posted in fertility law, gay men surrogacy, lesbian parenting, Natalie Gamble Associates news, same sex parenting | Comments Off
Sunday, April 7th, 2013
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority has voted to update the guidance it gives to UK fertility clinics on surrogacy. The new Code of Practice will:
* clarify what UK clinics should say to surrogacy patients, and
* update clinic procedures and forms for surrogacy.
The HFEA voted to make these changes (following advice from NGA and its own lawyers) at its meeting on 20 March 2013 and will now undergo a period of consultation on the practicalities, before the new Code of Practice is introduced on 1 October 2013. This includes a workshop for clinics and professionals practising in surrogacy, to be held at the HFEA on 30 April 2013.
We congratulate the HFEA on a very sensible decision, which will mean clearer guidance for parents and clinics dealing with increasing numbers of surrogacy cases. In particular, it will be made clear that where a surrogate is unmarried, one of the intended parents (whether gay or straight, and whether or not a biological parent) can be named on the child’s initial birth certificate together with the surrogate. This approach will make the HFEA’s guidance entirely consistent with longstanding practice at register offices and in the family courts.
You can find out more about the HFEA meeting on 20 March here, and there is more on our website about surrogacy law.
Note added – Natalie has written an article for Bionews on this issue ‘The HFEA gets into gear on surrogacy’ which you can read online here.
Tags: Authority meeting 20 March 2013, Code of Practice, HFEA, Natalie Gamble Associates, surrogacy campaigning, surrogacy law, surrogacy lawyer, UK surrogacy
Posted in fertility law, gay men surrogacy, same sex parenting, UK surrogacy, Uncategorized | Comments Off
Friday, March 15th, 2013
The decision in Re A & B (Parental Order: Domicile) represents another landmark ruling for NGA – a parental order having been granted to a non-British gay couple following the birth of their son through Indian surrogacy last year.
The case not only clarifies the law for foreign but UK-resident parents conceiving through surrogacy, but also shows how same sex parents are being drawn to the UK’s open culture and law. We were proud to have supported the parents in this case through to successful conclusion, and once again to have helped make new law.
What happened?
The parents, who are American and Polish respectively, moved to the UK as a couple in 2008 (having registered their domestic partnership in California four years earlier). They were initially attracted to the UK by our unrivalled equal laws and gay rights – something they were not afforded in their respective home counties. Having decided to start a family, they found a surrogate through an agency in India and were delighted when their son was born in 2012. On their return to the UK they sought help from NGA to establish the non-biological dad’s parental status, which led to their application for a parental order (the legal solution following surrogacy, enabling both intended parents to become their child’s legal parents under UK law).
What does the law say?
In order to be eligible for a parental order, at least one of the intended parents must demonstrate to the court’s satisfaction that they are ‘domiciled’ in a part of the UK. Domicile for these purposes is more complex than simply where a person lives – it comes down to where their permanent roots and allegiances lie. This particular criterion (one of a number of strict requirements attached to the parental order) is designed to prevent foreign parents ‘forum shopping’, by using the UK court to grant them a more favourable legal solution than their own country might. The parents in this case therefore had to show that they had made the UK their permanent home and that, notwithstanding their American and Polish citizenship status, they had cut their ties with the US and Poland and did not intend to return.
What did the court consider?
In order to establish whether the parents in this case had met this high bar, the judge considered a number of factors in detail. She was particularly assisted by the parents’ statements, which outlined in detail their connections here (including that they ran a UK based company and both intended to apply for British citizenship at the earliest opportunity) and their affection for the UK including their very personal reasons for making it their home and the place that they raise their family, away from the discrimination abundant in their home countries. The judge went on to quote one of their reasons for not returning to the US, “We will never return and raise our son in a society in which schools may censor him from talking about his family”, as a factor which bolstered their contentions.
Why is this case significant?
Mrs Justice Theis reiterated in this case the importance, for non-British parents applying for a parental order, of demonstrating a clear intention to make the UK their permanent home – the court otherwise being powerless to make a parental order. The judge was also assisted by an independent investigation of the circumstances surrounding domicile by CAFCASS Legal, who found that the parents had abandoned their respective domicile of origins in favour of English domiciles of choice. This case (in addition to Z v C [2011]) provides helpful guidance for future non-British parents through surrogacy who hope to apply for a parental order.
What you need to know if you are not British, or are British and based abroad, and considering applying for a parental order
Domicile is a far-reaching principle of law and far from contingent on just one factor. Having dealt with the key cases which have tested the law on this, we would be happy to advise you on your eligibility to apply for a parental order, no matter what your circumstances. You can contact us here, or alternatively there is more information about domicile on our website.
Tags: commercial surrogacy, domicile, fertility law, fertility lawyer, gay men conception, gay parenting, gay surrogacy law, Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act, Indian surrogacy, international surrogacy, international surrogacy law, law, Mrs Justice Theis, Natalie Gamble Associates, Re A and B (parental order domicile), same sex parenting law, surrogacy agreements, surrogacy law, surrogacy lawyer, surrogacy solicitor
Posted in fertility law, gay men surrogacy, international surrogacy, Natalie Gamble Associates news, same sex parenting | Comments Off
Saturday, February 2nd, 2013
NGA has been contacted by UK patient organisations trying to clarify the implications of the High Court’s ruling, which has allowed two sperm donors to argue in court that they should have rights of contact with their biological children. NGA has been representing the lesbian mothers in this case.
The ruling received a lot of press attention yesterday (including on the front page of the Daily Mail, and in the Guardian, Telegraph, Independent and BBC). Natalie spoke to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, the British Fertility Society, the National Gamete Donation Trust and the Donor Conception Network – all seeking further information about what to say to patients, donors and donor conceived families who were contacting them.
The HFEA and the BFS have issued press statements in response to the ruling.
We thought it would be helpful to provide a clear summary of what the ruling means for these organisations and others concerned about this:
* The ruling only gave the two donors the right to argue their case in court. It is not yet know whether they will be given any rights of contact with the children.
* The reason for the decision was very fact specific, a result of the fact that the donors were known to the lesbian mothers and had contact with the children in their early months before relationships broke down. The court was satisfied, on the facts, that the donors had sufficient connection with the children to at least justify their cases being heard in court.
* The ruling is therefore exceptionally unlikely to apply to donors who have had no contact with the child – for example unknown donors through licensed clinics.
* However, the ruling could apply to other types of known donors, including known sperm or egg donors who have donated through a licensed clinic, if they can demonstrate sufficient connection with the child in practice. Although in this case conception took place outside a licensed clinic, the law which provided that these men were ‘not to be treated as the father for any purpose’ is the same law which excludes the status of other types of egg and sperm donors.
* The ruling does not in any way affect donors’ responsibilities – it does not make it possible to hold a donor legally or financially responsible for a child they help conceive.
For further information on the case (including the judgment) see our blog. You can also follow us on Twitter for updates.
Tags: British Fertility Society, donor, donor conception law, Donor Conception Network, egg donor, High Court, Human Fertilisation and Embryology, Mr Justice Baker, Natalie Gamble Associates, National Gamete Donation Trust, Re G, Re G (a minor) and Re Z (a minor) [2013] EWHC 134 (Fam), Re Z, sperm donor
Posted in Co-parenting, donor conception, fertility law, Natalie Gamble Associates news, same sex parenting | Comments Off
Thursday, January 31st, 2013
The High Court has today made a landmark ruling, allowing two civilly partnered sperm donors the right to ask for contact with their biological children (against the wishes of the children’s respective lesbian mothers), but also warning that it will consider the need to protect the lesbian families carefully before a final decision is made. NGA is representing the mothers in the case of Re Z, one of the two connected cases.
The ruling has significant implications for same sex parents and families created through donor conception. It is the first case to test rights for same sex parents introduced by Parliament in 2008, which give lesbian mothers the same legal protection following sperm donation as opposite sex parents. Under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008, the mothers in this case, as civil partners, are the legal parents of their children. The biological fathers, like sperm donors through clinics, are expressly excluded from being treated as the legal fathers ‘for any purpose’. Relationships broke down after the men each sought more involvement than the mothers agreed. They applied to court, and the court has now ruled that they can have their cases heard.
The court’s decision opens the door to legal claims from sperm donors who want involvement but have no legal parental status. But the judgment also makes it clear that every case will be considered carefully. Donors will not simply be treated as other fathers are, and protecting the primary family is also a material consideration.
Donors will only be able to seek redress on the basis of the the particular facts, where this is justified. In Re G and Re Z, the fact that the donors had had early contact with the children was what persuaded the court that they should at least be allowed to have their cases heard. However, although the court has given the donors ‘leave’ to apply, it does not necessarily follow that they will actually be given any rights of contact, and the court has warned that the underlying legal framework will be a significant consideration, and that the level of contact originally being sought may be considered ‘wholly unrealistic’.
Mr Justice Baker suggested that there was no principle being created of automatic rights for donors to lesbian couples: “I endorse the submissions that the policy underpinning these reforms is an acknowledgement that alternative family forms without fathers are sufficient to meet a child’s need… Thousands of children in this country are being brought up happily and successfully by same-sex couples.”
Going forward, there are some significant lessons for same sex parents (and anyone conceiving through known donation):
Lesbian mothers need to understand that being named on the birth certificate does not give absolute protection. Conceiving with a known donor will always carry some level of risk if things don’t work out as intended, so mothers should be very careful about giving any level of contact unless they are absolutely sure.
Gay fathers who act as known donors need to understand that their legal position may be more fragile and uncertain than they think. Men who want to be fully involved fathers will not have any automatic rights if there is a dispute.
Everyone going into known donation or co-parenting arrangements should be crystal clear about their expectations from the outset. Setting the strongest possible foundations at the start is the best way of avoiding later problems. One way to do that is to put an agreement in place, but the real key is good communication – an agreement is a means to that rather than an end in itself. There is more from our blog on How to Avoid a Known Donor Dispute.
You can read the judgment in full to Re G (a minor) and Re Z (a minor) [2013] EWHC 143 (Fam).
At NGA, we provide leading specialist advice to parents conceiving through known donation, including same sex parents, both male and female, and leading representation to those in disputes. We have worked at the cutting edge of the law, pushing boundaries, for many years, and were instrumental in helping create the rights for same sex parents in the HFE Act 2008. There is more information on our website about known donor disputes and about planning known donation for mothers and for fathers. You can also follow us on Twitter for the latest updates on our work and campaigns.
Tags: dispute, father, gay dads, High Court, known donor, lesbian mums, lesbian parent, lesbian parenting law, Mr Justice Baker, Natalie Gamble, Re G, Re G (a minor) and Re Z (a minor) [2013] EWHC 134 (Fam), Re Z, same sex parent, same sex parenting law, sperm donor
Posted in Co-parenting, donor conception, fertility law, Natalie Gamble Associates news, same sex parenting, Uncategorized | Comments Off
Friday, January 25th, 2013
Metro featured a big spread on Wednesday asking whether commercial surrogacy should be made legal in the UK.
Read Natalie’s comments on the increasing acceptance of surrogacy, and the need to create a more structured legal framework, as well as legal changes urgently needed to include single parents and to give intended parents legal status from birth. The Metro article is here.
You can also find out more about surrogacy law and our campaigning work from our website. Follow us on Twitter if you want to get involved.
Tags: Barrie Drewitt-Barlow, British Surrogacy Centre, commercial surrogacy, Metro, Natalie Gamble, surrogacy law, Surrogacy UK, UK, UK surrogacy
Posted in gay men surrogacy, international surrogacy, Natalie Gamble Associates news, same sex parenting, UK surrogacy | Comments Off
Tuesday, January 22nd, 2013
Red Magazine has a feature this month about alternative routes to parenthood. From Melanie and her husband who have surrogate twiblings born five days apart, to gay dads with twins created with the same egg donor but each of their sperm (something we actually see quite a lot of), Kate Bussmann shows just how much is now possible, and the positive impact that increasing diversity is having.
Natalie talks about our experience on the ground of working with non traditional families and says:
“I’m constantly surprised by how many variations there are on having a child, the technologies available and the situations people get themselves into… Gay families are obviously different, so they are inevitably having those conversations with children and developing the language. I think it’s helping heterosexual couples deal with some of those issues, because they can see same-sex couples dealing with it in such a positive way. We have experienced a real cultural shift, particularly with donor conception – 20 or 30 years ago, heterosexual couples were told it was best never to tell the child. Now everyone is encouraged to be open and treat it as a positive thing. It’s a complete revolution in thinking. “
The article has a positive message, with stories including that of Fiona O’Driscoll of Surrogacy UK whose surrogate is now ‘Auntie Kate’ to her kids, and research from Stonewall which shows that children with same sex parents are just as likely to be happy as any others. It explores how gay parents are helping to push some positive trends, and how language is evolving fast to keep up.
It’s great to see such a positive piece, which really does reflect what we see on the ground every day. As Kate Bussmann says so eloquently: “And of all the parents I spoke to, gay or straight, with donors or surrogacy, the stories were almost entirely positive. They’re proud of forging their own version of ‘normal’ and more than one of them described the ‘richness’ that comes with having all those extra people in their lives.”
Amen to that.
You can read the Red feature in full here, or find out more about surrogacy, donor conception and our campaigning work from our website.
Tags: alternative family, fertility law, Fiona O'Driscoll, Jacqueline Davies, Kate Bussmann, Natalie Gamble, Red magazine, same sex parent, Siobhan Freegard, Surrogacy UK, UK surrogacy
Posted in family building, fertility law, Natalie Gamble, same sex parenting | Comments Off
Tuesday, January 22nd, 2013
There has been press coverage over the past couple of days about the new Indian surrogacy laws blocking gay dads from accessing surrogacy in India. It is an issue which has been brewing for a while, with a Bill lurking in the Indian Parliament for the past two years designed to regulate the Indian surrogacy industry and to stop foreign parents conceiving children they can’t take home. The changes affect all foreign parents considering surrogacy in India, but hit gay dads particularly hard.
Although the new draft Indian law itself has not yet been enacted, it seems that it is being brought into force by the back door. The Indian authorities have started requiring foreign parents obtain a ‘medical visa’ to travel to India for the purposes of engaging in a surrogacy arrangement (and this covers trips involving any treatment, including leaving sperm samples).
What has happened this week, as reported in the Times of India, is that Indian surrogacy clinics have been notified that they must register with the Indian Council for Medical Research (ICMR) and ensure their foreign patients have the visa before giving any treatment. Surrogacy clinics are, in other words, being given responsibility for enforcing the new visa requirements.
What are the new requirements?
In practice, UK parents are in a better position than those in other countries where surrogacy is not recognised at all, but gay dads and unmarried couples will not be eligible. To get the medical visa for surrogacy in India, the Indian authorities say that:
1. The parents must be a man and woman, married for at least 2 years.
2. The parents’ home embassy must provide a letter confirming that their country recognises surrogacy and that any child born will be entitled to enter the parents’ home country. The British High Commission has helpfully issued a letter for this purpose which is available on their website here.
3. The couple must undertake to care for the child.
4. The clinic must be recognized by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR).
5. The couple must have a notarised surrogacy agreement with their surrogate mother.
6. The couple must be informed that they need an exit visa under Indian law to take their child out of India after the birth and, to get that, they must have taken custody of their child and discharged all their responsibilities as per their surrogacy agreement.
So what now?
Many parents we work with go to the US for surrogacy, where there is a much more established legal framework which is supportive of all types of families and of surrogacy generally. For those with a more limited budget, the UK is probably the safest option, albeit that it has its own challenges. Other international destinations (places like the Ukraine) are likely to revive as a result of these changes in India.
Parents contemplating international surrogacy also need to bear in mind that, even without these new Indian law issues, international surrogacy law is complicated and that the UK legal position does not automatically reflect the law in the destination country. There is more information about the UK legal issues associated with international surrogacy on our website.
Tags: gay dads, ICMR, Indian surrogacy, Indian surrogacy law, international surrogacy law, medical visa, same sex parents, surrogacy visa, Times of India
Posted in family building, fertility law, gay men surrogacy, international surrogacy, same sex parenting | Comments Off
Friday, January 11th, 2013
We are thrilled to have been nominated by G3 magazine for two of their Readers’ Awards. As a team, NGA has been nominated for the Family Provider/Initiative of the Year, while Natalie has been nominated as Diversity Champion of the Year.
Introducing the Awards, G3 says:
“The Awards are designed to showcase those individuals and organisations who have demonstrated an outstanding commitment to the LGBT community. We believe that those who go the extra mile to ensure equality of opportunity and fair treatment for all, deserve to be recognised.”
Thank you so much to the readers who nominated us. The winners will be unveiled at an awards ceremony hosted by Charlie Condou and Sophie Ward in April. If you would like to vote for us to win, you can vote here.
Tags: alternative family, Diversity Champion, donor conception, Family Provider/Initiative, G3 award, gay parent, lesbian parent, Natalie Gamble Associates, UK surrogacy
Posted in civil partnership, donor conception, fertility law, gay men surrogacy, lesbian parenting, Natalie Gamble Associates news, same sex parenting | Comments Off
Tuesday, November 20th, 2012
Natalie was interviewed on BBC Radio 4 Woman’s Hour on Thursday on the topic of private sperm donation. The programme feature NGA client Mark Langridge (the donor who has been pursued for child support by the CSA twelve years after donating his sperm to a lesbian couple) and Laura Witjens, Chief Executive of the National Gamete Donation Trust, with Jenni Murray asking ‘what makes a father’?
You can listen to Natalie on Woman’s Hour here.
At NGA, we advise many prospective parents (and donors) considering a known donation arrangement, helping them to set things up with the strongest foundations.
We sadly also help people whose known donation arrangements have broken down, both representing donors pursued for child support and lesbian and solo parents whose donors seek more involvement than they want.
You can find out more from our website about known donation and about known donor disputes.
Tags: child support, donor agreement, donor dispute, lesbian parent, Mark Langridge, Natalie Gamble, sperm donation, sperm donor, Woman's Hour
Posted in Co-parenting, donor conception, Natalie Gamble, same sex parenting, Uncategorized | Comments Off
Natalie and Richard were at the G3 awards on Friday night, a gala evening hosted by Charlie Condou and Sophie Ward, celebrating leading figures and influencers in the LGBT world. 
Natalie Gamble Associates is known for its pioneering work pushing the boundaries of the law for same sex parents. The team has helped thousands of alternative families, including acting in the groundbreaking cases which have made UK law on donor conception and international surrogacy. NGA campaigns on behalf of alternative families, successfully defending the right for same sex parents to be named on birth certificates together back in 2008, and recently winning a long campaign to give gay dads through surrogacy equal maternity leave rights.
