PDA

View Full Version : Twins get married. By accident



Aurelias Kazaar
Jan 11th, 2008, 02:58:49 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080111/wl_uk_afp/britainchildrenadoptionmarriage&printer=1;_ylt=AnagCAzuRMH_lJ7BueQjR8rjOrgF


Oops.



LONDON (AFP) - Twins who were separated at birth and adopted by different sets of parents later married each other without realising they were brother and sister, a peer has told the House of Lords.
<NOSCRIPT></NOSCRIPT>


David Alton, an independent, pro-life member of the Lords, said the brother and sister were granted an annulment after a high court judge ruled that the marriage had never validly existed.
The Catholic politician -- who discovered the case after talking to a judge -- used it to highlight perceived deficiencies in the government's proposed Human Embryology and Tissues Bill, which is currently going through parliament.
The bill is designed to make it easier for lesbian and gay couples to have children through assisted reproduction, recognising same-sex partners as legal parents of babies conceived through donated sperm, eggs or embryos.
But it contains no provision to require the identity of the donor to be disclosed, potentially meaning a child could not be told they were conceived by assisted reproduction.
Alton raised the case of the married twins -- who were born after IVF treatment -- during a debate on December 10, details of which only appeared on Friday.
"There are implications for everybody involved, but the needs of the child will always be paramount, and it is right that we should therefore make the process as transparent as possible," Alton told the Lords.
IVF -- which increases the chances of multiple births -- meant such cases could become more common if the law does not require children to be told they were donor conceived and have access to their genetic history, he said.
"The right of children to know the identity of their biological parents is a human right," he added Friday.
"There will be more cases like this if children are not given access to the truth. The needs of the child must always be paramount."
The identities of the twins and details of their relationship and marriage have been kept secret, but it was known they were separated soon after birth and never told they were twins.
They only discovered they were blood relatives after the wedding.

Kelly Perris
Jan 11th, 2008, 04:48:42 PM
Haha, I think that's more than an 'oops', my friend.

More like... scarred for life. :lol

Lilaena De'Ville
Jan 11th, 2008, 04:58:26 PM
But why would you get IVF and then give your kids up for adoption? That's just... irresponsible!

Hera
Jan 11th, 2008, 05:14:31 PM
What a horrible story.

Jedi Master Carr
Jan 11th, 2008, 07:41:15 PM
But why would you get IVF and then give your kids up for adoption? That's just... irresponsible!

I have no idea, I think the people agains IVF are just using this case to further their own cause. These twins weren't even born with IVF.

Atreyu
Jan 11th, 2008, 08:15:16 PM
The twins themselves weren't born via IVF - they were naturally born then separated when they were adopted out.

Their case has been highlighted however since there's the possibility, with same sex couples having access to IVF using surrogate fathers/mothers, that somehwere down the track you can have to people who are half brother/sister ending up in the same situation as these twins without realising.

Wyl Staedtler
Jan 12th, 2008, 01:06:58 AM
LONDON (AFP) -
Alton raised the case of the married twins -- who were born after IVF treatment--...

I understood it to mean they were born via IVF...??? :huh

Lilaena De'Ville
Jan 12th, 2008, 03:39:43 AM
^^^ me as well. What else could that mean?

Jedi Master Carr
Jan 12th, 2008, 11:08:15 AM
I though it meant that they were born before the treatment existed. I didn't think that stuff existed 20 years ago.

Dasquian Belargic
Jan 12th, 2008, 11:19:51 AM
IVF has been around and in practice since the late '70s, IIRC.

CMJ
Jan 12th, 2008, 11:26:01 AM
I read about this on another messageboard. We have a pretty interesting discussion going on about how we would react in that situation.

Jedi Master Carr
Jan 12th, 2008, 02:42:15 PM
IVF has been around and in practice since the late '70s, IIRC.

heh well my mistake, not sure why I thought it hadn't.

Kraehe Branwen
Jan 12th, 2008, 09:18:46 PM
I don't understand why it's so wrong for a child to know who their parent is when they have been adopted. Its become so commonplace for someone to abandon their child that it can become more and more common for something like this to happen. My mother heard that they were devastated because they really truly loved one another, which is sad. THey shouldn't have to go through this because of laws forcing them to be in the dark about who they really are.

Jedi Master Carr
Jan 13th, 2008, 12:37:42 AM
I don't understand why it's so wrong for a child to know who their parent is when they have been adopted. Its become so commonplace for someone to abandon their child that it can become more and more common for something like this to happen. My mother heard that they were devastated because they really truly loved one another, which is sad. THey shouldn't have to go through this because of laws forcing them to be in the dark about who they really are.

Well I think the law varies from state to state. I think the child can find out if they want to. I think the only people that can't find out is anybody else.

Atreyu
Jan 13th, 2008, 03:57:50 AM
^^^ me as well. What else could that mean?
My interpretation was the same as JMC's - referring to them being born before IVF treatment existed (or at least became commonplace), not that they themselves were born via IVF. :)

I agree it would be logical for children to be able to find out without too much complication who their actual biological parents are, but that also raises the issue of whether the biological parents actually want their children to find them or not, not to mention how legal parents might think about it (I'm willing to guess that at least some people who adopt babies/young children would probably like their 'kids' to think of them as their real parents and may be afraid of the relationship being damaged if their kids realise they aren't - I don't know, only reaching for straws on why it would be an issue).

In Australia, there have been several reports of this type of thing happening in regards to the Aboriginal population as a result of the stoeln generation situation - with the forced removal of Aboriginal children some decades ago there were instances of Aboriginal people marrying only to later discover they were brother & sister. Pretty sad. :(

Peter McCoy
Jan 13th, 2008, 10:20:12 AM
I had to laugh at the headline this article had in the Daily Star newspaper, it had a sub-header of "The most amazing story you'll ever read". I guess Nelson Mandela's 'Long Walk To Freedom' isn't all it's cracked up to be in their eyes, eh!?

Park Kraken
Jan 18th, 2008, 01:05:04 AM
So I take it they had...relations... before they were discovered to be blood relatives? If the female twin is pregnant, then that raises a very interesting question. Do you want to bring an inbred child into the world?