IVF mothers can name ANYONE as 'father' on birth certificate

Family values were under attack again last night with the news that single women having IVF will be able to name anyone they like as their baby's father on the birth certificate.

New regulations mean that a mother could nominate another woman to be her child's 'father'.

The 'father' does not need to be genetically related to the baby, nor be in any sort of romantic relationship with the mother.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1158322/Another-blow-fatherhood-IVF-mothers-ANYONE-father-birth-certificate.html

thats stupid in my opinion, poor fathers (biological)

Isn't the key here that it's SINGLE women who can name 'anyone'? As far as I know, if you go to a sperm bank, you don't get to know the name of your donor and I'm pretty sure he wouldn't want full parental responsibilties anyway (as techincally at least, an anonymous donor could father hundreds of children) so whats wrong with naming another responsible adult as the co-parent?

Seahorse wrote:Isn't the key here that it's SINGLE women who can name 'anyone'? As far as I know, if you go to a sperm bank, you don't get to know the name of your donor and I'm pretty sure he wouldn't want full parental responsibilties anyway (as techincally at least, an anonymous donor could father hundreds of children) so whats wrong with naming another responsible adult as the co-parent?

Absolutely nothing.

could this be linked to the dissolution of the csa i wonder, the new toned down version has little power?

call me old fashion but i believe children need a father and a mother at home ,not two fathers or two mothers , or one missing ,i know some times it can't be helped i was a single parent for a while after a messy divorce, but i can't understand why some just think its ok to go and have a baby or babies without thinking about the father etc.

the prob these days is they generally have at least two on one parent, but as long as both genetic parents are interested, then it cant hurt i guess