13/06/2026
We are working with several families around issues with birth certificates and parental rights. Please contact us if you are experiencing any issues in this area
A woman in Northern Ireland whose wife gave birth to a child through a private s***m donor is not entitled to be legally recognised as a second parent, the Court of Appeal has ruled.
Senior judges held that she had failed to qualify for the available legislative routes to getting her name put on the birth certificate.
The woman at the centre of the legal battle and her wife have been in a relationship since 2011.
They conceived a child together in 2018 following an arrangement made privately with a s***m donor who agreed not to seek a parental role after the child was born.
The couple then held their wedding in 2021, a year after same-sex marriage was legalised in Northern Ireland.
By that stage, the woman had sought a declaration of parentage and to be registered on the birth certificate of a child for whom she holds parental responsibility.
But the Court of Appeal has completely dismissed the challenge. Lady Chief Justice Dame Siobhan Keegan said granting a declaration of parentage would go against public policy.
"Notwithstanding the sympathies that arise for this family, the court must respect the statutory scheme," Dame Siobhan stated.
"That is the simple answer to this case."
Lawyers for the woman argued that the prohibition on same-sex marriage when the child was conceived amounted to unlawful discrimination, as she would have been recognised as a second parent had they been allowed to wed at that stage.
It was also contended that an inability to access publicly funded IVF treatment was discriminatory on the grounds of sexuality.
Both the Secretary of State for Health and Stormont Departments of Finance and Health opposed her legal challenge.
They insisted it would contradict public policy to grant a declaration outside of the provisions of the statutory scheme.
The appeal judges backed those submissions and held that the woman was not completely prohibited from acquiring legal parentage.
The court found she would have been treated as a second parent if the couple had been in a civil partnership at the time of conception.
Dame Siobhan stated the couple made a conscious decision not to avail of this route based upon principle and their beliefs.
She ruled that exceptions cannot be made for the couple just because same-sex marriage or publicly funded IVF treatment were unavailable when the child was conceived.
