halfpint Posted May 4, 2007 Report Posted May 4, 2007 Leah was in a relationship with Jessie at the time. However, he would not be considered Pippa's father unless Leah named him on the birth registration as such. Unless things have changed you did have the option of not naming the baby's father (in NSW at least). I am sure it was mentioned that Flynn was named as the baby's father (which he is). So on the original registration Leah (as the birth mother) and Flynn would be listed as the parents. Flynn and Sally (who is the natural mother) would had to applied to "adopt" Pippa and any certificate would then show Sally and Flynn as Pippa's legal parents. Leah would had to give up her "rights" as the birth mother. I am sure there was something about a contract being drawn up at the time Leah agreed to be the "birth" mother.
leaglelou Posted May 4, 2007 Report Posted May 4, 2007 Leah was in a relationship with Jessie at the time. However, he would not be considered Pippa's father unless Leah named him on the birth registration as such. Unless things have changed you did have the option of not naming the baby's father (in NSW at least). I am sure it was mentioned that Flynn was named as the baby's father (which he is). So on the original registration Leah (as the birth mother) and Flynn would be listed as the parents. Flynn and Sally (who is the natural mother) would had to applied to "adopt" Pippa and any certificate would then show Sally and Flynn as Pippa's legal parents. Leah would had to give up her "rights" as the birth mother. I am sure there was something about a contract being drawn up at the time Leah agreed to be the "birth" mother. In Australia surrogacy is not actually legal, you cannot pay someone to carry your child like in america where the surrogate has no legal rights to the child. In Australia Leah was considered the "legal" mother of Pippa with Flynn her father as it was his sperm. So therefore Sally had to adopt baby pippa from Leah, which i find quite rediculous as it was Sally's egg, but unfortunately thats the law in this country. As for Sally having another child with Brad, i too recall Leah being their last chance as they used the previous eggs with Sophie. It may be a further hurdle in the Brad/Sally relationship though if Brad wants a child of his own. Funny how both brother and sister (Rachel & Brad) are with partners who can't give them a biological child!!
Ryan Posted May 4, 2007 Report Posted May 4, 2007 Maybe they could get together, have twins and then share them out.
c120701 Posted May 4, 2007 Report Posted May 4, 2007 In Australia surrogacy is not actually legal, you cannot pay someone to carry your child like in america where the surrogate has no legal rights to the child. In Australia Leah was considered the "legal" mother of Pippa with Flynn her father as it was his sperm. So therefore Sally had to adopt baby pippa from Leah, which i find quite rediculous as it was Sally's egg, but unfortunately thats the law in this country. I knew that from the Irene surrogacy storyline as she had to go to America because it wasn't legal in Australia, I just assumed that the law had changed because Leah was able to stay in Australia. EDIT: I've just read that surrogacy is now legal in New South Wales, which is why Leah didn't have to go anywhere else.
Alison C Posted May 4, 2007 Report Posted May 4, 2007 In Australia surrogacy is not actually legal, you cannot pay someone to carry your child like in america where the surrogate has no legal rights to the child. In Australia Leah was considered the "legal" mother of Pippa with Flynn her father as it was his sperm. So therefore Sally had to adopt baby pippa from Leah, which i find quite rediculous as it was Sally's egg, but unfortunately thats the law in this country. I knew that from the Irene surrogacy storyline as she had to go to America because it wasn't legal in Australia, I just assumed that the law had changed because Leah was able to stay in Australia. EDIT: I've just read that surrogacy is now legal in New South Wales, which is why Leah didn't have to go anywhere else. There was an item on the news here in the UK the other night about surrogacy. It is not legal un the UK to pay someone to be a surrogate but as far as I am aware surrogacy itself is not illeagal. The item was about westerners who go to Indai and pay women to have their baby. The item infered that because it is illeagal to pay someone to do it here it is difficult to find willing surrogates.
HOTMAILBABE Posted May 4, 2007 Report Posted May 4, 2007 I think you're right, Ryan and Hotmailbabe. There's an interesting article here that outlines how women/couples in NSW who use a surrogate, even if the surrogate has no biological ties, have to go through the legal action of adopting their child back from the surrogate parents. Unless Sally and Leah went through an official adoption, which they may have done as part of the surrogacy then Leah is seen as the legal mother and Dan (even if he had nothing to do with it) is the legal father. We know that Leah can't have any more kids and she was devastated by that so it could make for a good future storyline. Thank you i knew i was right, i don't know much about surrogacy but i did read something in the news paper before about someone who done surrogacy and when she had the baby she could give the babe to the people who she was having the baby for, in the end she did have to give the baby up to the people because by law she was the biological mother. that how i knew about little Pippa. thank you ryan and bodwod for checking it out
bodwod Posted May 5, 2007 Report Posted May 5, 2007 Maybe they could get together, have twins and then share them out. Hmm, they may have a few biological problems of their own born to a brother and sister team. Think I'll pass on that storyline. Ick!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.