When toddlers attack

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

A list of what NOT to read to your little ones

I used to get a big kick out of ads on TV for a toy called "My Interactive Poo."  Okay, I imagine it was actually spelled "Pooh," but the image it conjured up was, well, you know, kids playing with something they shouldn't really be interacting with.  So I got a big chuckle out of this slideshow on Huffington Post, especially, of course, "Cooking with Pooh":  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/29/the-creepiest-childrens-b_n_513489.html#s75964


Wednesday, March 3, 2010

A good analysis of last year's Spanish surrogacy ruling

I found this analysis of Spanish law on an international law webpage (http://conflictoflaws.net). Marta Requejo is a law professor at the University of Santiago de Compostela, so it looks as if that answers my question:  the Spanish government has conferred citizenship on surrogacy-born children.  Not sure we'll be testing the law ourselves, tho'.

Si algún lector español tiene más información, por favor dejame un comentario.

Spanish Homosexual Couple and Surrogate Pregnancy (II)

by Marta Requejo on March 14, 2009

In a previous post I related how a certificate issued in the U.S.A., establishing the parenthood of a baby born in this country to a surrogate mother, had been denied registration in Spain. The interested parties lodged an application for review before the Dirección General de los Registros y el Notariado (DGRN); on February 18, 2009, their appeal has been upheld. This post sums up the arguments on which the Spanish resolution is based.
The DGRN starts selecting the correct methodological approach: the request for registration in Spain of a birth certificate from a foreign authority arouses questions of recognition, and not of conflicts of law; hence art. 81 Reglamento del Registro Civil should apply. According with this article, facts can be registered by means of Spanish public documents; public foreign deeds are also accepted, provided they are given force in Spain under the laws or international treaties. A foreign act has to meet three conditions in order to be suitable for registration in Spain:
 .- The deed must be a public one: it has to stem from a public authority and meet the necessary requirements to be considered “full evidence” (i.e., to display privileged evidentiary strength) when used before the courts of the country of origin. Apostille or legalisation are usually called for; so does translation. In the instant case, the Californian certificate of birth and filiation satisfies those conditions.
.- The public authority granting the document has to be equivalent to the Spanish ones; that is, she mut provide with guarantees similar to those required by the Spanish law for entering into public registers. According to the DGRN, the authority responsible for civil registration in California satisfies this requirement.

.- The act contained in the foreign registration certificate must endorse a legality test involving three elements: international jurisdiction of the  foreign authority, due process, and compatibility with Spanish public order. In the case in point only the third requirement seems questionable. The DGRN devotes the rest of its reasoning to explain why incorporation of the foreign certificate to the Spanish Registro Civil  is not contrary to our public policy; why it “does not alter the smooth and peaceful running of the Spanish society”.

To this end the DGRN develops several points that may be summarized as follows:

1) Registering parenthood of two male subjects in the Spanish Registro Civil does not violate public order, since Spanish law admits paternity of two males in cases of adoption, and adopted children and biological children are equal in the eyes of law.

2) Spanish law allows registration of parenthood of female couples; to deny it in the case of a couple composed of two male individuals would be discriminatory.

3) To deny entry into a Spanish public register of facts concerning parenthood, already inscribed in a foreign register, would go against the best interests of the child as conceived in UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. The DGRN also recalls ECJ case law, such as Garcia Avello (C- 148/02) and Grunkin-Paul (C-353/06), where the ECJ argues in favour of a unique identity of the child. Later on the DGRN would reintroduce the argument of the child’s interest: allowing registration in Spain in the same terms as Californian registration is better than leaving the children without any registration in Spain, and also preferable to having two different entries, one in the U.S. and another one in Spain.

4) In Spanish law, parenthood is not necessarily determined from the genetic linkage of those involved.

5) The interested parties have not acted in fraud of law; they have not tried to change the nationality of children in order to prompt the application of Californian law. The babies, born to a Spanish person, are Spanish.

6) The interested parties have not engaged in forum shopping or any fraudulent attempt to circumvent the application of Spanish mandatory rules. The Californian certificate of registration is not a court decision with res judicata effect. Any party may challenge the content of the birth registration before the courts; if so, the Spanish Courts would establish the paternity of children once and for all.

Tuesday, March 2, 2010

Is that the sequel to "Eat Drink Man Woman?"

So one of the things I've started doing since I added the accursed live traffic feed at the bottom is to compulsively check it, watching as all the little flags collect around the world.  Obsessive, but it seems every blogger does it.  I've posted a couple of articles in Spanish in hopes of providing some information to Spanish-speaking IPs -- so far, it's pretty sparse, but I'll add more as I come across it.

I was a bit amused, though, to see that Tarrytown, New York, arrived on the blog doing a search for "alquiler mujeres strip phone," which translates to "rent women" and, you guessed it, "strip phone."  Feel free to click on the link.  I have a feeling a blog about two prospective gay dads isn't what Tarrytown was searching for...

Monday, March 1, 2010

My cup runneth over

I have a little black, plastic bag in the back seat of our Ford Escape hybrid that contains two, little plastic collection jars.  My doctor gave them to me about a month ago when I told him I needed to have a semen analysis done.  They're the standard ones you carry into the bathroom with you when you have to do a urinalysis.  Now, depending on how much coffee you've had on a given morning, filling one on demand under those circumstances can be challenging enough.  But we're not talking about peeing in a cup here.  And two?  What does he think I'm going to do with two?
I feel totally inadequate.

Apparently the test takes place some three months before you plan to head to India to leave your genetic material in the hands of the medical team there (uh... not literally... I don't mean literally).  We haven't yet surrendered ourselves 100 percent to the process, so the bag and its contents ride along with me wherever I go, mocking me, impugning my manhood.

No backseat passengers have seemed to notice it yet, so I haven't had to answer any questions I'd prefer not to.  Truth is, I don't really mind talking about it, unless the person doing the asking is my mother. I'm afraid the mere thought of discussing the mechanics of providing a sample with my mother would make the eventual act  impossible for me:

Internal dialogue:  "She knows."

"No she doesn't.  You can do this.  She's on the other side of the city."

"She's on the other side of the city... but SHE KNOWS!"

Lucky for me my mother is unaware of this blog's existence and the lab I need to go to is in the distant suburb of Arcadia -- I barely know where that is, but it's a full valley and area code away from anywhere haunted by maternal relatives.