There’s not any importance to this: it’s just something I’m curious about.
Are children of a civil partnership legitimate?
OK, obviously, this isn’t important as we don’t attach much importance , if any at all, to that “legitimate” part these days.
And given that civil partnerships are, by definition, among same sex couples in the UK then it’s doubly not important.
Except, of course, some same sex couples do indeed have children. Using surrogates perhaps for one set, sperm donation or IVF for the other set.
And are such children thus defined as legitimate according to however it is that the law defines a child as legitimate?
To take this to an extreme. Take one of the titles that can be inherited through the female line. There’s a few Scottish I think. If the female heir to such a title had a civil partnership, and within that had a child through a sperm donation, would that child be considered legitimate and inherit that title?
Or to take it even further: if the civil partner had the child (thus there is no genetic connection) would that child inherit the title?
Or a male line title. I think there are one or two such who are in civil partnerships. If they, through a surrogate, had a child would that child then inherit the title? And would it be different dependent upon whose sperm was used?
Yes, I do realise this isn’t important. And it’s got nothing at all to do with whether gay marriage should be allowed or not (and indeed, all of the same questions would apply to such). I’m just interested to know that’s all.
Another way of asking this is did the parliamentary draughtsmen think through all the implications of that civil partnership law?