The European Parliament Wants to Authorize “Multiple Parents”

The debate clearly showed that, for Brussels, parenthood has nothing to do with the natural family, made up of biological parents and their children. The EU regulation for a European certificate of parenthood, adopted by Parliament in the vote, explicitly provides, in addition to children resulting from surrogacy contracts, for so-called “multiple-parent” children.

A Problematic Adoption

According to the ALfA (Aktion Lebensrecht für Alle, Action for the Right to Life for All) – a German association which defends the absolute right to life – the adoption of this regulation remains very problematic, a stance about which we can only be delighted.

First, if we consider the point of view of the member states of the European Union (EU). Adopting the definition would be a way of restricting the right of EU states to define families in a way that corresponds to their national legal conception.

And then because the regulation allows paternity established in one Member State to be recognized throughout the EU, even in situations such as surrogacy. However, this point is currently very disputed and countries have already indicated that they would refuse it.

Finally, with this regulation, the EU exceeds its competences and adopts family laws which are the exclusive responsibility of the States. The term “parenthood” is not synonymous with parentage, which describes relationships with children. The extension of the term “parenthood” to any form of relationship between children and people in the household where they grow up is a violation of the principle of subsidiarity.

The regulation also expressly provides that rules such as the recognition of partnerships and children can be adopted sovereignly by the Member States.

From the Children's Point of View

This regulation is worrying: the creation of a European paternity certificate based on a conventional definition of paternity could certainly be in the interests of children. But if “parenthood” no longer concerns biological descendants, this opens the door to children resulting from surrogacy (GPA) being treated as objects that can be bought or thrown away.

Thus, no surrogacy contract will be signed without a clause stipulating the right of the commissioning parents to abort the “ordered” child, for example due to an illness diagnosed before birth. Furthermore, establishing such a certificate of paternity would prevent children from knowing their origins.

There is therefore a very problematic internal contradiction within Parliament: in the directive on preventing and combating human trafficking and protecting victims, Parliament expressly qualified surrogacy in October as a form of human trafficking.

However, it is very likely that the project will fail: according to European treaties, it would have to be adopted unanimously to be legally binding. However, the project reveals the power of certain lobbies who strive to modify the law in EU countries through biases, leading to the destruction of natural law. And this undermining work often ends up being successful.