header-logo header-logo

29 May 2008
Issue: 7323 / Categories: Legal News , Family , Human rights
printer mail-detail

IVF law change removes legal absurdity

News

A legislation change which will legally allow a child to have two mothers and no father when parents undergo fertility treatment removes an “absurdity” in the present law, a family law expert claims.

Following a vote in the Commons, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill will update previous legislation to remove the reference to a father.
Margaret Hatwood, an associate at Thomas Eggar, says: “Where two women are in a relationship and one has fertility treatment to conceive then the partner should be treated as the other ‘parent’ even when the couple are not in a civil partnership. In those cases no man can be treated as a father to avoid a child having three legal parents which would be an absurdity.”
She says it will be interesting to see whether once this Act is in force, it will give non-biological parent more rights.

“In Re G, heard on 26 July 2006 by the House of Lords, a residence dispute involving two lesbian mothers was ultimately resolved with the dispute being resolved in favour of the biological mother. Although a shared residence order was made it gave the biological mother more time with the children. The House of Lords gave priority to the biological mother’s claims even though the mother’s former partner was a psychological parent,” she says. “It would be fascinating to see if this case would be looked at differently when the new Act is in force.”

Issue: 7323 / Categories: Legal News , Family , Human rights
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll