TS women and motherhood

[SarahG]

A transexual lady can have her legal status changed to female if she is femininzed and has had her sexual reassignment surgery.

Not always true, that is a generalization. Because of case law and the gay marriage bans, legal sex status in MOST US states is now based on what chromosomes you have (XX = girl, XY = guy).

Having ID that says female doesn't mean you're legally seen as female in the eyes of the law... texas will let you change your DL even before srs (and will let postops change their BC If i recall right), however in terms of probate law (marriage, wills etc) after the Littleton case, postops are not in texas legally female.

If all your paperwork says female you maybe able to get away with marrying in some of these states, but the marriage would not stand up in court if it were ever to be legally challenged... per the Littleton case it can even be retroactively invalidated.

[ParisTlover]

I have seen a photo of Vaniity and her daughter, on Vaniity's yahoo group.
Now thats a MIlF!!

[Lady Angela]

In many of the northern states and west coast states, transexual women can get their legal status changed to female, with the rights that genetic women have, including marriage and adoption.

[peggygee]

I have heard they are doing research on males having babies though. The male just carries the baby and the delivery is done through C Section. Who knows what modern science will bring.

There are a number of theorized options.

(Here is one proposed technique)

The uterus, not the cervix, fallopian tubes or ovaries would
be transplanted as indicated by the illustration.



Ideally a hysterectomy performed on a close relative would
provide a viable uterus, ie, one that would be less likely to
be rejected.

Further, the transplanted uterus would only be in place long
enough for the pregnancy to complete, and then would be
removed, so that the women would not have to remain on
drugs to prevent her body from rejecting the transplant.

Also note, the arteries supporting the blood flow, thus negating
the circulatory concerns you put forth.

By the way IVF stands for, in vitro fertilization. A method of
assisted reproduction that involves combining an egg with
sperm in a laboratory dish. If the egg fertilizes and begins cell
division, the resulting embryo is transferred into the woman's
+ uterus where it will hopefully implant in the uterine lining and
further develop. IVF may be performed in conjunction with
medications that stimulate the ovaries to produce multiple eggs
in order to increase the chances of successful fertilization and implantation.

At the current level of reproductive science, a transsexual woman,
would not be able to be impregnated in the conventional manner,
but rather would have to go this route.

Why, I can almost hear the pitter-patter, of little 'peggys' and little 'denzel's' feet.

Now, if we could only do something about the 'poopy diapers' and
his or her college tuition, we will be half way home

[peggygee]

A transexual lady can have her legal status changed to female if she is femininzed and has had her sexual reassignment surgery.

Not always true, that is a generalization. Because of case law and the gay marriage bans, legal sex status in MOST US states is now based on what chromosomes you have (XX = girl, XY = guy).

Having ID that says female doesn't mean you're legally seen as female in the eyes of the law... texas will let you change your DL even before srs (and will let postops change their BC If i recall right), however in terms of probate law (marriage, wills etc) after the Littleton case, postops are not in texas legally female.

If all your paperwork says female you maybe able to get away with marrying in some of these states, but the marriage would not stand up in court if it were ever to be legally challenged... per the Littleton case it can even be retroactively invalidated.

Transgender People and Marriage: The Importance of Legal Planning

Developed by Shannon Minter, senior staff attorney for the National Center for Lesbian Rights.

Transgender people face unique legal issues with regard to marriage. Although marriage is not yet a legal option for gay or lesbian people in any state, it is already an option -- and a reality -- for many who are transgender. This article summarizes the legal issues surrounding marriage for transgender people and suggests some ways that transgender people can protect their marital relationships.

A very real option

Some people are aware that transgender individuals are often able to enter into a heterosexual marriage after undergoing sex-reassignment. What may be less well-known, however, is that a transgender person may also be married to a person of the same sex. That situation arises, for example, when one of the spouses in a heterosexual marriage comes out as transsexual and transitions within the marriage. If the couple chooses to stay together, as many do, the result is a legal marriage in which both spouses are male or female. Alternatively, in states that do not allow a transgender person to change his or her legal sex, some transgender people have been able to marry a person of the same sex. To all outward appearances and to the couple themselves, the marriage is a same-sex union. In the eyes of the law, however, it is a different-sex marriage because technically speaking, the law continues to view the transgender spouse as a legal member of his or her birth sex even after sex-reassignment. In short, marriage is a very real option for a variety of transgender people in a variety of circumstances.

Two contrasting cases

In practice, however, the legal validity of marriages involving a transgender spouse is not yet firmly established in the great majority of states. In 1999, for example, an appellate court in Texas invalidated a seven-year marriage between Christine Littleton, a transgender woman, and her deceased husband. The case arose when Ms. Littleton brought a wrongful death suit seeking damages for her husband’s death as a result of alleged medical malpractice. Rather than ruling on the merits of Ms. Littleton’s suit, the court held that a person’s legal sex is genetically fixed at birth and that Ms. Littleton should be deemed to be legally male, despite her female anatomy and appearance, and despite the fact that she had lived as a woman for most of her adult life. As a result of that decision, Ms. Littleton was denied all of the rights afforded to a legal spouse -- not only the right to bring a wrongful death suit, but the right to intestate inheritance (or inheritance without a will), to obtain her deceased husband’s Social Security and retirement benefits, and many others as well.

In contrast, in 1997, a trial court in Orange County, Calif., affirmed the validity of a marriage involving a transgender man. The case arose when the wife sought to invalidate the marriage in order to deprive her husband of his parental rights vis-a-vis the couple’s child, who was born through alternative insemination. The trial court rejected the wife’s argument that the transgender husband should be considered legally female and refused to nullify the marriage. The court held that California law recognizes the post-operative sex of a transsexual person for all legal purposes, including marriage. Notably, however, if the court had ruled differently, or if the transgender spouse had not undergone extensive and expensive sex reassignments surgeries prior to the marriage, it is likely that he would have lost any right to maintain a relationship with his child.

Still the need to protect yourself

As these and other similar cases make clear, it is critical that transgender people who are married become aware of their potential legal vulnerability and take steps to protect themselves as much as possible. As an initial matter, transgender people who are married should certainly act accordingly and should not hesitate to exercise their rights as legal spouses, whether that be the right to file married tax returns, the right to apply for spousal benefits or the right to have or adopt children as a married couple. At the same time, however, it is also important to create a safety net in the event that the validity of the marriage is challenged.

Although there are many benefits and protections that arise exclusively through marriage and cannot be duplicated through any other means, there are also some basic protections that can be safeguarded and secured through privately executed documents and agreements. At a minimum, a transgender person who is married should have:

(1) A last will and testament for both spouses;

(2) Financial and medical powers of attorney in which each spouse designates either the other spouse or another trusted person to be his or her legal agent in the event of incapacitation; and

(3) A written personal relationship agreement including a detailed account of each spouse’s rights and responsibilities with regard to finances, property, support, children and any other issues that are important to the couple.

The agreement should also include an acknowledgment that the non-transgender partner is aware that his or her spouse is transgender to avoid any later claims of fraud or deception. Ideally, the couple should draft those documents with assistance from an attorney and supplement them with any other legal planning documents that are appropriate for their specific circumstances.

With those basic documents in place, transgender people who are married can at least ensure that the spouses can inherit each other’s estates and retain control over their own financial and medical decisions, even if the validity of the marriage is challenged. In many cases, the safety net created by extra legal planning will never have to be used. In others, the presence of that extra protection will shelter the transgender person and his or her spouse from devastating emotional trauma and financial loss.

[peggygee]

From the thread: Children and transsexuals - can we have them?

In a previous post, we discussed the possibilities of transsexuals
becoming pregnant.

http://www.hungangels.com/board/view...light=pregnant

In this post;

What is particularly significant is that these agencies and others
have gone on record and outlined policies allowing transsexual,
gay or non-heterosexual couples the oppurtunity to adopt.

Further, if it is in the best interest of the child, (which is a customary
term, and always a consideration) and all other things being
equal, there should be nothing precluding a 'non-traditonal' family
from the adoption process

Thus if a couple has the financial wherewithal, and can provide a child
with a stable living environment, there shold be nothing to hinder them
from doing so.

This is a win-win for all. The child wins, as she gets a loving, nurturing
home. A committed couple wins because they now have a childrearing
option that they might not have had otherwise.

http://www.hrc.org/Template.cfm?Sect...ontentID=17907

American Bar Association (2003, 1999 and 1995)

On gay and lesbian parenting. The American Bar Association adopted the
following position statement in Aug. 2003:

"RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association supports state and
territorial laws and court decisions that permit the establishment of legal
parent-child relationships through joint adoptions and second-parent
adoptions by unmarried persons who are functioning as a child's parents
when such adoptions are in the best interests of the child."

On gay and lesbian parenting. The American Bar Association adopted the
following position statement in Feb. 1999:

"RESOLVED, that the American Bar Association supports the enactment of
laws and implementation of public policy that provide that sexual
orientation shall not be a bar to adoption when the adoption is determined
to be in the best interest of the child."

On child custody and visitation. The American Bar Association adopted the
following position statement in Aug. 1995:

"BE IT RESOLVED, that the American Bar Association supports the
enactment of legislation and implementation of public policy providing that
child custody and visitation shall not be denied or restricted on the basis
of sexual orientation."


Child Welfare League of America (198

The Child Welfare League of America's Standards of Excellence for
Adoption Services states:

"Applicants should be assessed on the basis of their abilities to
successfully parent a child needing family membership and not on their
race, ethnicity or culture, income, age, marital status, religion,
appearance, differing lifestyles, or sexual orientation." Further, applicants
for adoption should be accepted "on the basis of an individual assessment
of their capacity to understand and meet the needs of a particular
available child at the point of adoption and in the future."

CWLA source document


Voice for Adoption (2006)

The board of directors of Voice for Adoption passed the following position
statement on discrimination in Sept. 2006.

"Voice for Adoption believes that children deserve every opportunity to
have a permanent, loving family, and that ruling out prospective parents
through discrimination limits children's options for permanency."

"We oppose policies and practices that discriminate against prospective
parents, including but not limited to discrimination based on age, race,
ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion, marital status, family size,
disability, medical condition, geographic location, employment status,
occupation (including employment in the child welfare system), and
educational attainment."

"We support making decisions about approving prospective parents and
matching waiting children on a case-by-case basis, based on the
strengths of the family and the best interests of each child."

National Association of Social Workers (2002)

The National Association of Social Workers approved the following policy
statement at in August 2002 at the NASW Delegate Assembly.

"Legislation legitimizing second-parent adoptions in same-sex households
should be supported. Legislation seeking to restrict foster care and
adoption by gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender people should be
vigorously opposed."

Source: Social Work Speaks: National Association of Social Workers
Policy Statements, 2003-2006.


North American Council on Adoptable Children (199

The North American Council on Adoptable Children issued a policy
statement in 1998 (amended April 14, 2002) that states:

"Children should not be denied a permanent family because of the sexual
orientation of potential parents. Everyone with the potential to
successfully parent a child in foster care or adoption is entitled to fair and
equal consideration."

NACAC source document

If interested please take a moment to peruse the rest of the site.

http://www.hrc.org/Template.cfm?Sect...ontentID=17907

[alpha2117]

I have seen a photo of Vaniity and her daughter, on Vaniity's yahoo group.
Now thats a MIlF!!

I think you mean Mia Fever

[elo]

BUMP

[SexyMagdi]

Hmm for Id say yes and no. No because I dont want to go through the pain and all the stuff a GG goes through in nine months. Plus the stretch marks and Ill have to work harder to get my body back the way it was. Yes because you have the feeling of a life growing inside you. And well youll feel happy that all that work and hardship was worth it when you hold you baby in your arms.

[MacShreach]

Hmm for Id say yes and no. No because I dont want to go through the pain and all the stuff a GG goes through in nine months. Plus the stretch marks and Ill have to work harder to get my body back the way it was. Yes because you have the feeling of a life growing inside you. And well youll feel happy that all that work and hardship was worth it when you hold you baby in your arms.

Hi Magdi. I've been watching your posts with interest, though we haven't spoken before. Would you mind very much if I asked how old you are? Your comments are very much in line with what many younger natal women say, especially those with education and/or a decent job. They have the health concerns, the loss of liberty concerns, the career concerns. This seems to change about age 30.

Having seen the procedure at close range several times I know pregnancy is tough, but mainly in the last couple of months, unless the dreaded morning sickness is a problem.

Peggy already commented in depth about new techniques and I don't feel qualified to add anything there. What I would say is that I know several non TG couples who were childless (in every case because of the man having damage resulting from mumps in childhood) and have adopted, usually with very successful results. However, in private, the women in these situations usually admit they feel they have missed out on something. They do love their adopted children but they seem to feel that not having gone through carrying them...well, in part it seems to be like a rite of passage they did not complete, and in part I think they are curious as to whether the blood relationship of a natural mother to her children is somehow deeper. (I personally don't believe it is, but I'm a man and less qualified.)

Anyway I'm curious as to how transsexual women deal with this on a personal level, how you plan to structure your lives as women to include such landmark achievements. Or is it (for those who plan to have SRS) that this is such a huge watershed, a divide in your lives that you really can't see clearly how things might be on the other side of it until you get there?