Please read here on how to use images on RoyalDish. - Please read the RoyalDish message on board purpose and rules.
Images containing full nudity or sexual activities are strongly forbidden on RoyalDish.


Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 12   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Marquess of Bath  (Read 95322 times)
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Sanguine

Mini Member
***

Reputation: 97

Offline Offline

Posts: 329





Ignore
« Reply #120 on: May 15, 2016, 04:56:17 PM »

I was browsing through this thread, and all I can say is that the Marquess of Bath should really be called the Marquess who Looks Like he Needs a Bath.  Shocked
Logged
LDJJ

Humongous Member
**********

Reputation: 1082

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 5483





Ignore
« Reply #121 on: May 15, 2016, 05:06:09 PM »

Congratulations on 100 posts Sanguine!  Banana
Logged
Sanguine

Mini Member
***

Reputation: 97

Offline Offline

Posts: 329





Ignore
« Reply #122 on: May 18, 2016, 01:00:30 PM »

Congratulations on 100 posts Sanguine!  Banana

Thanks, LDJJ! I'm having a lot of fun here! 
Logged
shastadaisy

Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 292

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 969





Ignore
« Reply #123 on: January 08, 2017, 03:25:18 AM »

Baby number two for Ceawlin and Emma born late December...

Longleat heir has son born by surrogacy, in a first for British aristocracy, after medics warned Lady Weymouth may die in pregnancy

http://www.telegraph.co.u...irst-british-aristocracy/


Sent from my iPad
Logged
Lady Adelaide

Ginormous Member
***********

Reputation: 1189

Offline Offline

Switzerland Switzerland

Posts: 7832





Ignore
« Reply #124 on: January 08, 2017, 02:51:04 PM »

http://www.dailymail.co.u...ls-new-surrogate-son.html





Logged
smf3000

Warned
Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 436

Offline Offline

Botswana Botswana

Posts: 810





Ignore
« Reply #125 on: January 08, 2017, 06:06:30 PM »

Beautiful! 

Does being born to a surrogate make a difference?   Thinking I wonder what the rules of aristocracy and inheritance are here (if, god forbid, he was ever needed).
Logged
esther angeline

Humongous Member
**********

Reputation: 1352

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 5275





Ignore
« Reply #126 on: January 08, 2017, 06:39:50 PM »

John the elder child was born the "normal" way.  Only this one is by surrogate.  This baby has both the sperm and egg of his parents : He is the "heirs male of his body" ( his father)  as the ancient  rules commands.  Besides if nothing else, it is just like he had a baby by a second wife.
Logged
cordtx

Warned
Ginormous Member
***********

Reputation: 1431

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 9300





Ignore
« Reply #127 on: January 08, 2017, 08:56:53 PM »

Right, the surrogate was just the " carrier" , the genetic material was M&M of Bath genetic material
Logged
LDJJ

Humongous Member
**********

Reputation: 1082

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 5483





Ignore
« Reply #128 on: January 08, 2017, 09:37:22 PM »

I read this story last night and was very happy for them.  The boys are adorable.  Many congratulations to this family.
Logged
Curtains

Huge Member
********

Reputation: 1296

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2836





Ignore
« Reply #129 on: January 08, 2017, 09:46:10 PM »

However the baby came to them, it came with love included. Congratulations to all!
Logged

"Some of it's magic, and some of it's tragic: but I had a good life, all the way." - Jimmy Buffet, America's premiere poet
identitycrisis

Warned
Baby Member
*

Reputation: 32

Offline Offline

Posts: 92





Ignore
« Reply #130 on: January 08, 2017, 11:33:58 PM »

John the elder child was born the "normal" way.  Only this one is by surrogate.  This baby has both the sperm and egg of his parents : He is the "heirs male of his body" ( his father)  as the ancient  rules commands.  Besides if nothing else, it is just like he had a baby by a second wife.

I don't think so.

Quote
Under English law, the legal mother of a child born through surrogacy is always, at birth, the surrogate mother. This is because the law says that the woman who carries a child is the legal mother. Although this law was primarily intended to benefit mothers conceiving with donor eggs, in surrogacy cases it means that the intended mother has no recognition as a parent, even if she is her child?s biological mother.

If the surrogate is married, and conceives artificially (through IVF or artificial insemination at home) the legal father at birth is usually the surrogate?s husband and this is irrespective of the biological relationships. This means that the intended father has no automatic claim to legal parenthood. This applies unless it can be shown that her husband did not consent to the surrogacy arrangement.

http://www.surrogacyuk.org/legalities

The way I read that is that child the Weymouths are his biological parents, they aren't his legal parents, so that that child isn't the "lawfully begotten heir male" of Weymouth's body. That child was legally born to the surrogate mother and either that woman's spouse or Weymouth is the legal father. Under the strict terms of peerage and surrogacy law, he was therefore born outside of wedlock (and therefore isn't "lawfully begotten"), and isn't an heir to the titles, though he can be styled as the son of a courtesy or substantive peer.
Logged
Margaret

Gigantic Member
*********

Reputation: 1285

Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 3776





Ignore
« Reply #131 on: January 08, 2017, 11:52:41 PM »

John the elder child was born the "normal" way.  Only this one is by surrogate.  This baby has both the sperm and egg of his parents : He is the "heirs male of his body" ( his father)  as the ancient  rules commands.  Besides if nothing else, it is just like he had a baby by a second wife.

I don't think so.

Quote
Under English law, the legal mother of a child born through surrogacy is always, at birth, the surrogate mother. This is because the law says that the woman who carries a child is the legal mother. Although this law was primarily intended to benefit mothers conceiving with donor eggs, in surrogacy cases it means that the intended mother has no recognition as a parent, even if she is her child?s biological mother.

If the surrogate is married, and conceives artificially (through IVF or artificial insemination at home) the legal father at birth is usually the surrogate?s husband and this is irrespective of the biological relationships. This means that the intended father has no automatic claim to legal parenthood. This applies unless it can be shown that her husband did not consent to the surrogacy arrangement.

http://www.surrogacyuk.org/legalities

The way I read that is that child the Weymouths are his biological parents, they aren't his legal parents, so that that child isn't the "lawfully begotten heir male" of Weymouth's body. That child was legally born to the surrogate mother and either that woman's spouse or Weymouth is the legal father. Under the strict terms of peerage and surrogacy law, he was therefore born outside of wedlock (and therefore isn't "lawfully begotten"), and isn't an heir to the titles, though he can be styled as the son of a courtesy or substantive peer.

I would assume the Weymouths will apply for a parental order, which should overcome all these difficulties. 
Logged
identitycrisis

Warned
Baby Member
*

Reputation: 32

Offline Offline

Posts: 92





Ignore
« Reply #132 on: January 09, 2017, 12:27:20 AM »

John the elder child was born the "normal" way.  Only this one is by surrogate.  This baby has both the sperm and egg of his parents : He is the "heirs male of his body" ( his father)  as the ancient  rules commands.  Besides if nothing else, it is just like he had a baby by a second wife.

I don't think so.

Quote
Under English law, the legal mother of a child born through surrogacy is always, at birth, the surrogate mother. This is because the law says that the woman who carries a child is the legal mother. Although this law was primarily intended to benefit mothers conceiving with donor eggs, in surrogacy cases it means that the intended mother has no recognition as a parent, even if she is her child?s biological mother.

If the surrogate is married, and conceives artificially (through IVF or artificial insemination at home) the legal father at birth is usually the surrogate?s husband and this is irrespective of the biological relationships. This means that the intended father has no automatic claim to legal parenthood. This applies unless it can be shown that her husband did not consent to the surrogacy arrangement.

http://www.surrogacyuk.org/legalities

The way I read that is that child the Weymouths are his biological parents, they aren't his legal parents, so that that child isn't the "lawfully begotten heir male" of Weymouth's body. That child was legally born to the surrogate mother and either that woman's spouse or Weymouth is the legal father. Under the strict terms of peerage and surrogacy law, he was therefore born outside of wedlock (and therefore isn't "lawfully begotten"), and isn't an heir to the titles, though he can be styled as the son of a courtesy or substantive peer.

I would assume the Weymouths will apply for a parental order, which should overcome all these difficulties. 
A parental order wouldn't change the fact that the child wasn't born inside the marriage of the Weymouths. It would make them his legal parents, but it wouldn't change the facts of his birth. So far, all rulings on peerage inheritances have continued to hold that a child must be lawfully begotten, and that's akin to being born in wedlock. So it overcomes the difficulty of who his parents are, but wouldn't give him rights to inherit the peerage. (Of course, it's likely a moot point, given his older brother, but should his elder brother's line ever fail, as the peerage laws currently stand, this child's line would be skipped over).
Logged
smf3000

Warned
Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 436

Offline Offline

Botswana Botswana

Posts: 810





Ignore
« Reply #133 on: January 09, 2017, 12:36:59 AM »

John the elder child was born the "normal" way.  Only this one is by surrogate.  This baby has both the sperm and egg of his parents : He is the "heirs male of his body" ( his father)  as the ancient  rules commands.  Besides if nothing else, it is just like he had a baby by a second wife.

I don't think so.

Quote
Under English law, the legal mother of a child born through surrogacy is always, at birth, the surrogate mother. This is because the law says that the woman who carries a child is the legal mother. Although this law was primarily intended to benefit mothers conceiving with donor eggs, in surrogacy cases it means that the intended mother has no recognition as a parent, even if she is her child?s biological mother.

If the surrogate is married, and conceives artificially (through IVF or artificial insemination at home) the legal father at birth is usually the surrogate?s husband and this is irrespective of the biological relationships. This means that the intended father has no automatic claim to legal parenthood. This applies unless it can be shown that her husband did not consent to the surrogacy arrangement.

http://www.surrogacyuk.org/legalities

The way I read that is that child the Weymouths are his biological parents, they aren't his legal parents, so that that child isn't the "lawfully begotten heir male" of Weymouth's body. That child was legally born to the surrogate mother and either that woman's spouse or Weymouth is the legal father. Under the strict terms of peerage and surrogacy law, he was therefore born outside of wedlock (and therefore isn't "lawfully begotten"), and isn't an heir to the titles, though he can be styled as the son of a courtesy or substantive peer.

I would assume the Weymouths will apply for a parental order, which should overcome all these difficulties. 
A parental order wouldn't change the fact that the child wasn't born inside the marriage of the Weymouths. It would make them his legal parents, but it wouldn't change the facts of his birth. So far, all rulings on peerage inheritances have continued to hold that a child must be lawfully begotten, and that's akin to being born in wedlock. So it overcomes the difficulty of who his parents are, but wouldn't give him rights to inherit the peerage. (Of course, it's likely a moot point, given his older brother, but should his elder brother's line ever fail, as the peerage laws currently stand, this child's line would be skipped over).

fascinatingly complex, IdentityCrisis  Star, thanks for the info  Thumb up
Logged
Herazeus
Banned
Banned
Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 609

Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1053





Ignore
« Reply #134 on: January 09, 2017, 12:49:50 AM »

The Aristocracy have idiosyncratic inheritance rules that don't apply to rest of society and or considered unfair to rest of society eg the rule about entailing entire estate to eldest boy and sod any siblings who may be left in penury if the parent doesn't throw them some scrapes.

Then there is the inheritance law which is probably practised more by the royals than by the rest of aristocracy. The rest of society are long past this law and have legislated for all scenerios including surrogacy and adoption.

The law summed up stresses 'of body' and 'in legal marriage'. It's not describing the title holder alone. It's also discussing the mother. In short it is saying baby should be borne of the body of female legally married to the titleholder in order to inherit.

That rules out adoption and surrogacy. Any title holder going down that road knows the resulting child is automatically not able to inherit even if the child is of the genetic material of his wife. It's a law that hasn't been updated, and each case has to petition parliament to grant them the inheritance. A surrogate child may as well come from his mistress since title holder is not married to surrogate.

That said, in this particular case, this is a second son. Even born in the usual manner, he is destined for scraps from the table as estate will be entailed to his older brother. The manner of his birth is not as important as that of his older brother. Should this second son become the heir, being born of a surrogate will become an important detail that leaves his inheritance open to challenge because of that law. I suspect he would be passed over because that's how it works.




Logged
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 12   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to: