BB FANS

A lesbian has won a "breakthrough" legal battle over access to the two children of her former lover, who is the biological mother of the girls.
Appeal Court judge Lord Justice Thorpe reversed a ruling made in November at Telford County Court, which denied a joint residence order to the woman.

She now shares responsibility for the girls with the mother.

This is the only way a same-sex partner who is not a biological parent can claim such responsibility.

Lord Justice Thorpe, a specialist in family law, said "firm measures" needed to be taken to safeguard "a vital side" of the children's life.

What has been said about the importance of fathers is of equal application in same-sex parents

Lord Justice Thorpe

The woman had lived with the mother of the girls, conceived by donor insemination, since 1995.

But their relationship broke down in May 2003 and the mother now has a new partner.

Telford County Court had heard that the mother tried to "marginalise" her former lover and their attitude towards one another had become "hostile".

Although the county court granted sole residence to the mother, the judge did allow contact to the former partner so that she could have a "significant role in the lives of the children".

The mother then announced she would be moving out of the area with her new partner.

Endless disputes

The court welfare officer said the move was an attempt to frustrate contact arrangements and that excluding the former lover would not help the children.

But the county court judge ruled that joint residency would lead to endless disputes and would not be in the best interests of the children.

Lord Justice Thorpe said on Thursday that the children would benefit from shared parental responsibility between the former partners.

He added: "What has been said about the importance of fathers is of equal application in same-sex parents."

It was the first case of its kind to reach the Court of Appeal, which imposed reporting restrictions barring identification of any of the parties involved.

oh dear lord ,, whatever next ,, Am I the only one who wants to scream and run to the hills reading this

Think I will join you HOS............poor bloody kids, what chance have they got at the average school

I think it's a fair judgement, and I would expect that the woman who is not the biological mother will show consideration for the children's needs. She was there for years with them - they must have been close, and total separation from them would cause hardship on both sides. The mother seems to have acted selfishly, and spitefully. She was using the children to 'get at' her former partner.

I hope it works out well for them all.

Oh dear me, the poor poor kids. Now they have mummy , mummies new friend and this other woman who isn’t related but has rights to come in and be be apart of their lives even though their actual Mummy hates her, plus where is Daddy in all this.

No wonder the countries we brought Christianity and morals too are now seeing us as the new morally corrupt, needing saving.

Is that not the case when parents split up and remarry? There's a Mummy, and Mummy's partner, and Daddy, and Daddy's new partner.

What's important is that the children feel they are loved, and that they get consistent care and guidance.

Surely this isn't the first time that a parent's new partner is disliked by the other parent? Adults should put their children first - but the same rules should apply for heterosexual and gay couples.