She decided she wanted to keep this baby. Her other two children are in the custody of her estranged British husband. She is Romanian and one of the gay couple is a former friend of hers-also Romanian.She agreed to surrogacy but then went back on her word. Also used homophobic language against the couple(.I didn't think your children could be taken off you for this) The female judge gave custody of the child to the gay couple and ordered all names should be kept secret. There has to be more to this otherwise it would be cruel to take a year old baby away from her mother. Just imagine the distress the baby must be going through.And as to secrecy--Gay couple ,one Romanian suddenly acquire a year old baby.???
having your mother venting her spleen on your father in the Mail can hardly be good for any child. As said before, the child's interests are paramount, and rightly so.
This development rather suggests the court got it right, giving the child to the parent less likely to drag its story through the pages of the gutter press.
/// This development rather suggests the court got it right, giving the child to the parent less likely to drag its story through the pages of the gutter press. ///
Not like the fathers wouldn't have, if the judges ruling had gone against them.
Tora - //"Maybe it's not considered in the best interest of the child. " - and giving it 2 "dads" is? right oh! //
You put forward this argument yesterday on a similar thread, and it singularly failed to fly - what makes you think it is going to get any meaningful support today?
just trying to see why this woman cannot be allowed to put her side. All this "to protect the child" cobblers is err cobblers. Let her be interviewed annonimously.
Perhaps you didn't notice, so I will carry out a copy and paste exercise just for you.
/// This development rather suggests the court got it right, giving the child to the parent less likely to drag its story through the pages of the gutter press. ///
TTT - // ... Let her be interviewed annonimously. //
By whom?
And surely, if she was anonymous, then no-one is going to know it is she who is putting forward her point of view, which renders the exercise somewhat redundant.