Sperm donors’ accounts of lesbian recipients: heterosexualisation as a tool for warranting claims to children’s ‘best interests’

Scholz, Brett; Riggs, Damien W.

doi:10.1080/19419899.2013.764921

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Journeys to parenthood amongst Australian LGB people were often perceived as being complicated by heteronormativity and homophobia (Hayman et al, 2015;Riggs, 2009Riggs, , 2011Scholz & Riggs, 2014), including media portrayals of LGB people as incompatible with parenting (Zanghellini, 2007). For instance, lesbian parents anticipated less acceptance and support from community services and health or education staff (McNair et al, 2002), and gay foster carers feared a backslash if they raised concerns about marginalising practices in the foster-care system (Riggs, 2012a;2012b).…”

Section: Conception Methods Used By Australianmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Family Lives of Australian Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual People: a Review of the Literature and a Research Agenda

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Families and relationships are important social domains in which the circumstances of lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) people often differ from those of heterosexual people. Gaining a better understanding of the family experiences of Australian LGB populations has important implications for developing our knowledge about the changing demography and dynamics of Australian family life, as well as informing policy, practice, and public debate. This paper reports the findings of a review of empirical scholarship on the family experiences and outcomes of Australian LGB people published between 2000 and 2016, including academic publications and grey literature. The search yielded 99 outputs concerned with union formation, intimate partner relationships, pathways to and experiences of parenthood, child wellbeing, 'coming out', relationships with family-of-origin, social networks and support, and access to family services. There was wide coverage and a marked increase in LGB family scholarship over time, and a predominance of qualitative over quantitative studies. We identified several areas in which further Australian evidence is needed, including union dissolution, child adoption, relationships with extended family, and interactions with institutions providing family services. Australian scholarship would also benefit from leveraging new panel datasets and probability samples, considering intersectionality, and contributing to cross-national comparative studies.

show abstract

Section: Conception Methods Used By Australianmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Family Lives of Australian Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual People: a Review of the Literature and a Research Agenda

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One of the most consistent findings of research on LGBTQ parenthood is that the fundamental principle underlying people's reproductive decisions is the prioritization of child welfare (e.g., Ravelingien et al, 2015;Scholz & Riggs, 2014;Touroni & Coyle, 2002). For example, studies of lesbians who became parents with donor sperm through private arrangements find that, as they "anticipate a child's future interest" (Ryan-Flood, 2005, p. 196), mothers manage relationships with the donor according to "developing views on how to meet their children's needs" (Haimes & Weiner, 2000, p. 484), which are seen as "an over-arching priority" (Almack, 2006, p. 19).…”

Section: The Overarching Priority Of Children's Needsmentioning

confidence: 98%

More Natural Does Not Equal More Normal: Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual People’s Views About Different Pathways to Parenthood

Pralat

2018

Journal of Family Issues

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Heterosexual reproduction is often seen as normal and natural, with the two descriptors commonly understood as mutually reinforcing. I argue that, despite their apparent similarity, the meanings of “normal” and “natural” are distinct in important ways—a distinction that questions the positioning of lesbian motherhood and gay fatherhood as inferior. Through an analysis of lesbian, gay, and bisexual people’s ethical judgments about different ways of creating families, I show that pathways to parenthood that make a family appear “more normal” rely on means of reproduction that seem, in fact, “less natural.” Conversely, reproductive possibilities seen as “more organic” create families that depart more substantially from the cultural norm of the nuclear family. As a result of this tension, different pathways to parenthood can be justified as being “in children’s best interests.” However, while this children-centered justification can be flexibly applied, it also has contradictory meanings.

show abstract

“…Although the level of agreement that existed between the adults in both families was very high, it is possible that their intentions could change, particularly when considering that Betty, Eliza and Lenny were yet to conceive a child and Polly, Esther and Keane's child was yet to be born. A number of studies draw attention to disparities between the expectations of lesbian couples and gay donors in relation to donor-child relationships and roles, despite agreements between all parties on this matter prior to the conception and birth of children (see for example Dempsey, 2004;Dempsey, 2005;Dempsey, 2012;Riggs, 2008a;Riggs, 2008b;Scholz and Riggs, 2013). 9 Lenny and Keane will be in the more vulnerable position if intentions change or disparities in expectations were to arise, because only the women will be the legal parents of their children and only they will appear on the birth certificates.…”

Section: The Familiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gay and Lesbian Collaborative Co-Parenting in New Zealand and the United Kingdom: ‘The Law Doesn’t Protect the Third Parent’

Surtees

Bremner

2019

Social & Legal Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In many jurisdictions, legislation reflects, retains and reiterates heteronormative two-parent models of family. Lesbian and gay individuals and an increasing number of heterosexual individuals who choose to parent outside the paradigm of the conjugal couple relationship find neither their interests nor the welfare of their children is sufficiently protected in law. This article is based on the findings of two empirical research projects investigating the procreative autonomy of lesbians and gay men in New Zealand and the United Kingdom. It focuses on collaborative co-parenting families formed by lesbian couples and gay men, with reference to the allocation of legal parenthood in these kinds of families and case law across both jurisdictions. Two such families are introduced. Attention is drawn to the ways the law hampers these families’ preferred parenting arrangements. The article highlights the need for legislative change. It concludes that a more flexible, inclusive concept of legal parenthood that honours the intentions of those involved in these arrangements would potentially benefit all people interested in non-traditional parenting.

show abstract

Sperm donors’ accounts of lesbian recipients: heterosexualisation as a tool for warranting claims to children’s ‘best interests’

Cited by 8 publications

References 13 publications

The Family Lives of Australian Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual People: a Review of the Literature and a Research Agenda

The Family Lives of Australian Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual People: a Review of the Literature and a Research Agenda

More Natural Does Not Equal More Normal: Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual People’s Views About Different Pathways to Parenthood

Gay and Lesbian Collaborative Co-Parenting in New Zealand and the United Kingdom: ‘The Law Doesn’t Protect the Third Parent’

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About