When Heather Has 3 Mommies (or Daddies, or…)


My Family from WiddlyTinks.com

Big news out of Sacramento that has interesting implications for poly families:

California bill would allow a child to have more than two parents – State Politics – The Sacramento Bee.

“State Sen. Mark Leno is pushing legislation to allow a child to have multiple parents.

“The bill brings California into the 21st century, recognizing that there are more than Ozzie and Harriet families today,” the San Francisco Democrat said. …

The key factor is a child’s best interest: SB 1476 does not force judges to do anything, it only provides them with discretion to recognize multiple parents if doing so not only is beneficial, but is required for a child’s well-being, Leno said.”

In a similar ruling in the UK in March of this year Lord Justice Thorpe said:

“It is generally accepted that a child gains by having two parents. It does not follow from that that the addition of a third is necessarily disadvantageous”.

What do you think?  Is this great?  A nightmare in the making? Your thoughts?

~♥ Dawn

[Thanks to Oz in Seattle for the heads-up in email!]

♥∞♥∞♥∞♥∞♥∞♥∞♥∞♥∞♥∞♥∞♥∞♥∞♥∞♥∞♥∞♥∞♥∞♥∞♥∞♥

©2012, Dawn M. Davidson

2 thoughts on “When Heather Has 3 Mommies (or Daddies, or…)

  1. Auros

    I’ve thought for years that we ought to deconstruct family law. There’s no reason, for instance, that a pair of widowed sisters shouldn’t be able to live together as “a couple” for tax purposes, while designating a close friend to have their medical power of attorney, and another relative, or a friend’s child, as their default inheritor.

    Now, all of those things can be accomplished under existing law, through well-written contracts. But that’s expensive, and may be challenged by hostile family members in court, seeking to restore the default arrangements of a crabbed and unimaginative system of family law that is based on centuries-out-of-date ideas about the economic and emotional situations of a “family”.

    If I were dictator for a day, I’d abolish the use of “marriage” as a term of _law_ entirely, leaving that up to people’s communities to define, and replace it with a Civil Union EZ form that captures all of the same rights and responsibilities, while also making available a stack of forms (probably 10-20 pages) in which you would be able to untangle the relationships assumed in marriage and assign them to various people (in some cases more than one).

    Reply
    1. Uncharted Love Post author

      I’m so with you on this, Auros. 🙂 I’d love to see “marriage” as a spiritual/religious matter only, with civil union an entirely different thing. And frankly, I’d love to take all those rights and privileges now given to couples, and make them available to individuals instead. I’m not holding my breath, however, that this is going to occur anytime soon, maybe not even in my lifetime.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *