The Evolution of Birth Registration in England and Wales and its Place in Contemporary Law and Society

IF 1.5 4区 社会学 Q1 LAW Modern Law Review Pub Date : 2023-09-25 DOI:10.1111/1468-2230.12836
Liam Davis
{"title":"The Evolution of Birth Registration in England and Wales and its Place in Contemporary Law and Society","authors":"Liam Davis","doi":"10.1111/1468-2230.12836","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Birth registration, especially the birth certificate, is consistently framed as something which has always operated to document a person's parents and their (biogenetic) ‘origins’. This framing has become more prominent in recent years with the rise in (often queer) families challenging how law should register their families, often being unsuccessful. Analysing the history of birth registration, though, suggests this framing of birth registration is inaccurate. It is only in recent years that birth registration has supposedly taken on a new (or additional) policy aim of facilitating parent‐child relationships. This policy also arguably facilitates a particular type of relationship and trans‐parent families are focused upon as an example of where such facilitation does not occur. Through documenting the recent resurgence of interest in birth registration, this article aims to clarify the history and purpose(s) of birth registration showing how many assumptions surrounding the function of birth registration are misguided, and to open up discussion as to what its legal purpose(s) should be.","PeriodicalId":47530,"journal":{"name":"Modern Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Modern Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12836","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Birth registration, especially the birth certificate, is consistently framed as something which has always operated to document a person's parents and their (biogenetic) ‘origins’. This framing has become more prominent in recent years with the rise in (often queer) families challenging how law should register their families, often being unsuccessful. Analysing the history of birth registration, though, suggests this framing of birth registration is inaccurate. It is only in recent years that birth registration has supposedly taken on a new (or additional) policy aim of facilitating parent‐child relationships. This policy also arguably facilitates a particular type of relationship and trans‐parent families are focused upon as an example of where such facilitation does not occur. Through documenting the recent resurgence of interest in birth registration, this article aims to clarify the history and purpose(s) of birth registration showing how many assumptions surrounding the function of birth registration are misguided, and to open up discussion as to what its legal purpose(s) should be.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
英格兰和威尔士出生登记制度的演变及其在当代法律和社会中的地位
出生登记,尤其是出生证明,一直被认为是用来记录一个人的父母及其(生物遗传学)“起源”的东西。近年来,随着越来越多的(通常是酷儿)家庭挑战法律应该如何登记他们的家庭,这种框架变得更加突出,通常是不成功的。然而,分析出生登记的历史表明,这种出生登记的框架是不准确的。直到最近几年,出生登记才被认为是促进亲子关系的一个新的(或额外的)政策目标。这一政策也有可能促进一种特定类型的关系,而跨父母家庭被作为一个例子来关注,这种促进不会发生。通过记录最近对出生登记的兴趣的复苏,本文旨在澄清出生登记的历史和目的,表明围绕出生登记功能的许多假设是错误的,并就其法律目的应该是什么展开讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
61
期刊最新文献
Using AI to Mitigate the Employee Misclassification Problem StinePiilgaardPorner Nielsen and OleHammerslev (eds), Transformations of European Welfare States and Social Rights: Regulation, Professionals, and Citizens, Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2024, x + 226, pb £34.99 and open access Performative Environmental Law Thinking Legally about Remedy in Judicial Review: R (on the application of Imam) v London Borough of Croydon Legal Parenthood, Novel Reproductive Practices, and the Disruption of Reproductive Biosex
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1