As the Civil Unions Bill was passed through committee stage, we, a group of mothers who spoke on behalf of the rights of children in the debate on adoption by same-sex people, realised that, through this law, this will become legal.
However, this is probably not the end of the journey but the beginning of many other realities.
During the parliamentary debate, it was made rather clear that the law is not just there to cover adoptions by overseas or local families. MPs were also considering cases of Maltese homosexual couples who already had children through sperm donation or surrogacy. Thus, these realities are indirectly being legitimised even though both instances are not legal. These situations were never reflected upon in depth.
Stories of donor-conceived children raised many questions for us, the foremost being: what does this type of conception mean for the children?
Youth and adults conceived in this way recount that, throughout their life, they experience loneliness, sadness, loss of the biological father and a fear of rejection if the biological father is found.
Furthermore, they admit that this feeling of loss is not acknowledged by contemporary society.
Donor-conceived children suffer in silence while the fertility industry that assisted in their creation continues to support the virtue of anonymity.
These young people and adults speak about the right of genetic identity and how important it is for them. Knowing one’s roots, including knowing about one’s genetic identity, is an important part of who we are.
Many a time these children go through multiple DNA tests as well as searches in libraries and medical records since the search for the father is not always easy.
They are tormented by questions such as: who is my father? Does he have a family of his own? Would he embrace the idea of meeting me or even acknowledge my existence? Am I similar to him in some way, physically or otherwise?
Many journey through dark paths of emotional destruction and psychological torture as they seek ways of finding their original parents (stories from donor-conceived, www.AnonymousUs.org).
The stories of surrogacy have made us more conscious of the various medical, psychological and social difficulties faced by both the surrogate mother and the child
The stories of surrogacy have made us more conscious of the various medical, psychological and social difficulties faced by both the surrogate mother and the child.
In pre-natal classes, midwives highlight the beauty of bonding between the mother and child, which starts from pregnancy.
But surrogate mothers are forced to psychologically detach rather than attach with the child in their womb. This can lead to harmful psychological effects not only for the mother but also for the child.
Pregnancy becomes a business and a job, often an exploitative one.
These mothers are loved at first, used but then forgotten. These exploitive effects on the surrogate mother often do not manifest themselves until after the baby is relinquished (The Iona Institute, 2013).
The debate on adoption used the language of ‘rights’, the ‘right’ to have a family etc. This language of rights, when considering donor-conceived children or surrogacy, extends to choosing what kind of a child to have. Good-looking donors or surrogates with high academic potential are sought, keeping in mind the high amount of money being invested. Children are turned into commodities. Is this fair on the children?
There were times when we have been accused of creating stigma through our arguments.
We wish to make it clear that we will never stigmatise the person, especially the children of same-sex couples. Children are our focus, no matter how they are conceived.
It was not always easy for us to voice our concerns, especially when facing friends and family who are gay and who wish to have children, or mothers of gay children who have related to us their stories of fear, anger, disappointment and suffering they have been through.
When the law is enacted, we will still enjoy the company and share the throes of parenting with same-sex parents. Although we are in disagreement on points that are important to all of us, we still have many points in common.
It was always the need to be a voice for children that has spurred us to go on. We hope that this country remains a safe space where we can all voice our concerns.
Christine Rossi wrote this article with Martha Fitz and Suzanne Vella.