Gesa Teichert-Akkermann and Verena Akkermann are expecting their first child in the coming month. Thanks to an embryo donation, they will be a family that is protected like any other by Article 6 of the Basic Law.
So the Federal Constitutional Court made it unmistakably clear, and so – one would at least assume – marriage was also intended for everyone that has existed in Germany since 2017: as legal equality between homosexuals and heterosexuals.
For the child that Gesa Teichert-Akkermann carries, however, there will be an important difference compared to all children born into a heterosexual marriage: the co-mother Verena Akkermann will not legally count as a parent. If Gesa Teichert-Akkermann did not survive childbirth (which we do not assume, but rather wish her the best), the child would be orphaned. It would come into state custody and would then have to be adopted by Verena Akkermann.
Has the legislator forgotten to regulate an important little thing here? Couldn't be any different, the couple argues – and is now suing the Hildesheim district court for Verena Akkermann's determination of fellow motherhood. The fact that the parentage law is not yet at the level of constitutional and politically wanted equality can only be explained by "an unlawful legal loophole".
However, the legislature has not forgotten anything here. He got tangled up. Which rules, legal politicians in the Bundestag have been pondering for months, should apply to different constellations? What about multi-parenthood, for example, if a lesbian and a gay couple decide to have children and raise them together? Or: What rights should a sperm donor who comes from the couple's circle of friends and would like to take on a co-father role have? What happens if the biological father, who had given up a parental position and promised to stay out of his upbringing, later discovers feelings of parenting and suddenly wants to build a relationship with his biological child?
These are all difficult legal questions. But they may obscure the fact that there are also very simple cases. Why, in other words, do people in clear, uncomplicated constellations, such as the Akkermann couple, still have to suffer from legal uncertainty? Because there are completely different, more complex homosexual and transsexual family models?
The legal committee of the Bundestag should perhaps get used to the idea that there is something typical within the atypical or at least: easy to regulate, namely children from anonymous donations who are born into homosexual partnerships. It would not be difficult to close the regulatory gap for these cases – one would only have to apply the existing marriage and parentage law for heterosexual couples in an analogous manner. Further constellations could be regulated in further, separate legislative procedures.
Unbuckling and advancing – for some LGBTQ stakeholders, this should raise concerns about division and de-solidarization: once the lesbians have their rights, they will forget the multi-families or trans people, and the political pressure of the movement will dry up. But wouldn't it be more promising to build success on success, to justify the next step with each level reached instead of overloading the parliamentary process with input and input so that it groans?
The Akkermanns also asked Verena to be recognized as a fellow mother at the registry office of their home town. The official wrote back to them that "in the absence of a legal basis" this would not be possible. On a human basis, he adds that he regrets this – and wishes all the best for the delivery.