Mum forced to hand over baby to gay dad is gagged by courts
THE gagging of a mother whose baby was removed on the orders of a judge and given to a gay couple was last night denounced as ‘totally disproportionate’.
She is said to be devastated – but cannot give her side of the story because of a draconian court order.
The decision by a High Court judge to hand care of the 15-month-old girl to her gay father and his lover was astounding, a friend said.
Justice Alison Russell ruled that the mother should not be allowed to keep her own biological child after an alleged surrogacy deal she had struck with two gay men – one of whom is the biological father – broke down. The judge declared that the mother was ‘homophobic’ and had tried to smear the gay father.
She al s o accused t he woman of breastfeeding her daughter in a way that was calculated to ‘ frustrate’ contact between the child and her father. And,
‘Restrictions totally disproportionate’
although her ruling was made public yesterday, Ms Justice Russell made an order that bans the woman from speaking about the case.
The secrecy order that has silenced the mother comes despite a two-year campaign led by senior judges to open up the family courts south of the Border to greater scrutiny.
The judge who has led the drive, President of the Family Division Sir James Munby, has been worried that the family courts’ reputation for secrecy has led to widespread mistrust of the courts and the judges, lawyers, social workers and experts who work in them.
Lib Dem candidate for Birmingham Yardley John Hemming, a campaigner for openness in the courts, said: ‘How will it benefit the child to gag the mother? It benefits the court because it stops her from criticising the court.’
Tory candidate for Esher and Walton Dominic Raab said: ‘It is a cardinal principle of British justice that justice is not just done but seen to be done.
‘ In this case the reporting restrictions are totally disproportionate.’
Last night, the friend said the mother was a loving parent to her daughter.
‘Any accusation that she is homophobic is utter nonsense,’ the friend said. ‘I spoke to her after she lost the baby and she was absolutely devastated.’
The decision that the girl should live with the gay couple was the culmination of a long court battle.
The judge said the girl was born in January 2014 as a result of a surrogacy arrangement in which the mother agreed to bear the
‘Frustrated she can’t speak out’
child. The gay couple would be the main parents, while the mother – who first met the father when they were both teenagers in Romania – would live with them to share parenting.
The judge rejected the mother’s claim that the child – con- ceived after an insemination process at the gay couple’s home – was always going to be brought up by her, with secondary involvement from the father.
Ms Justice Russell ruled that the mother was lying and that she really only wanted to use the father as a sperm donor.
In a string of critical findings about the mother, the judge said she had been homophobic and offensive when she said the relationship of the gay couple was ‘on- off ’ and when she called them sexually promiscuous.
Ms Justice Russell said the child would have a more open and healthy upbringing with her father and his partner.
The mother’s friend – who asked to be identified only as Tom – said he was prepared to face prison for contempt of court for describing her reaction to the ruling.
He added: ‘She is frustrated by the fact that she can’t speak out. She told me that if I speak out I could go to prison and I said, “So be it”.
‘If you don’t stand up against this kind of thing it will get worse and worse and worse.’
‘I think Ms Justice Russell wants to make a name for herself, and say “Oh look, a gay couple are just as valid as parents as a heterosexual couple and it is better for the child to be with a gay couple than a single mother” – and she wants to have her name attached to that.’