“There is a political use of sentences”

The case started in Verona. It is fathers who have moved abroad to pursue their dream of having a son. They made it through a company in Canada. They found a woman to conceive for them. One of the two fathers donated sperm, and nine months later the parents took their child home With a legally recognized birth certificate in Canada. So they first went to the registrar of Verona for a transcription of one father, and a little later wrote a second one. But still The municipality, led at the time by Mayor Federico Sporina, refused to include the second parent. The couple, along with attorney Alexander Schuster, sued the Court of AppealHe proved the fathers right. But after reaching the Supreme Court, the question was taken to the attention of the Constitutional CourtWho said: “Present situation does not protect the child, let Parliament intervene”. Parliament did not intervene, and meanwhile the combined divisions of the Court of Cassation came in December, “cold rain” for the Veronese parents. Stotts actually wrote that a non-biological father (“intended father”) cannot be immediately recognized as a parent by the registrar (but can adopt the child instead). Reason: Our legal system considers two-father surrogacy illegal. Far less recent facts. “The most recent part of this story concerns the use of this sentence by the Ministry of the Interior, which has widened the field by including same-sex mothers in the field of refusal, who in very rare cases resort to surrogacy, deliberately ignoring that the penalty applies. For all couples, including heterosexual couples, who travel abroad to find surrogates, Veronese Alexander Schuster, a lawyer who has helped fathers and many same-sex couples, explains.

Counselor, can you better explain this case starting from Verona, which is the origin of all the disputes these days, the wars between prefects and mayors.
“The case is very simple: the judges of the integrated sections of the cassation talk about surrogacy, saying that in the case of singles or couples who have sought this practice, the non-biological parent cannot, without being prosecuted for any crime. Through a simple transcription, the child’s father/mother is automatically recognized. The cassation discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation. Does not show and clearly states in the sentence. But who is “pregnant to others?” In a pair of women, one of the two facing pregnancy, so the problem does not arise, because the mothers do not seek surrogacy through a hedralogist. On the contrary: only the intentional mother can be the genetic mother.