Friday, 1 October 2010

Double Standards



It's of no interest to me who Ed Miliband lives with in the posh part of London.  But, (yes you knew there would be a but), what does show his character is the fact he was 'too busy' to sign his name on his son's birth certificate.  For a man who is ambitious enough to want to lead this country, that is an appalling lack of judgement.

For some years I've been interested in ancestry.  Hanging around graveyards in pouring rain (it always seems to rain) is a hobby and an intriguing one.  Information I gather is shared with others and we've helped out people from all over the world because we've been able to discover burial places and the odd home or place of business of their ancestors.  Owing to the internet it's so much easier for those wishing to trace their family roots to find the relevant documents to get them started - birth, marriage and death certificates.

Ed Miliband does his family no favours with his casual attitude to his son's existence.  These days more people have no desire to marry and decide to have their children without the official record of their relationship.  Many other birth certificates don't have the father's name recorded.  I know the upset this causes because a member of my own family was born illegitimate in the 1930s and his father's name isn't recorded on his birth certificate and of course there is no marriage certificate.  The fact we can progress no further in the search is sad.

Another small point is that Ed Miliband voted strongly in favour of gay marriages and civil partnerships.  A strange decision from someone who doesn't appear to favour hetrosexual marriage isn't it.

20 comments:

RMcGeddon said...

Isn't Ed's brother Dave a jaffa ? Maybe Ed is the same and so can't claim to be the father ? Possibility.

Apogee said...

For a certain kind of socialist with a certain way of thinking, not so surprising.
All a matter of your priorities !

Joe Public said...

"....the fact he was 'too busy' to sign his name on his son's birth certificate."

Many would quite rightly, call him a 'selfish f#cker'.

He certainly found enough time to 'get his leg over'.

INCOMING!!!!!!! said...

Typical Marxist giving the rest of us the finger SR. He'll not be bound by any petty rules that the rest of us follow, Oh no not him, he's special!!!

If he gets into No10 it won't take him five seconds to put his nom de plume all over any Agenda 21 or UN treaties that will be stitching up us ordinary mortals, you see he's special. He's a Marxist.

subrosa said...

Had to look up that meaning RM. :) That wouldn't matter. As long as the mother agrees who the father is then the name can be on the birth certificate. No blood tests in this country (yet).

JRB said...

I think that in the weeks and months to come we will all find much that is unappealing about this young man.

His family, be that his brother or his son, have already discovered this unappealing side to his character.

K said...

If you read what actually happened his partner went along to register the birth and was told that she was not allowed to put his name on the certificate because they were not married.

If you are married, only one parent needs to go to the register office in order to include both names on the certificate. However, they are not married both partners need to be present.

Clearly Ed Milliband and his partner did not know this at the time. But they do now.

It has been suggested that he could just have popped in to the registry office afterwards and added his name but it is not as simple as that. The directgov website says that "If the father's details are not included in the birth register, it may be possible to re-register at a later date." "May" be possible. They seem to have arranged things so that he can register as the dad of their first child at the same time as registering their second child.

You can maybe pull them up for not doing their research - especially since one of them is a lawyer and the other one was a government minister at the time. But equally everyone makes mistakes. They are undoubtably busy people and there is surely no need to make a mountain out of a molehill. It is not as if he is disclaiming responsibility for his children, they just got one thing wrong and everyone is jumping all over him.

If you don't like Ed's policies and politics then say so. Don't pick on his family.

English Pensioner said...

I find it strange that those who can't get married (eg gays) want to get married, and those that can get married (ie Milliband) don't seem to want to!
If he couldn't manage to find the time to go to the registrar office at the time his mistress was registering the birth (any time within a couple of months or so), what won't he manage to find time to do on behalf of the country if he becomes PM?
And as you say, where would us genealogists be without records? A few weeks ago, my wife and I spent several days looking around graveyards in Ayrshire for my wife's ancestors now that the 1911 census has provided her with the town of her grandfather's birth rather than just "Scotland" as in the earlier censuses. Another couple of generations to add to her tree!

Joe Public said...

K @ 16:18

So, she was told he had to be present to register.

Most responsible mothers in a stable relationship who cared for their child's long-term well-being would have left, then returned with the father for a joint-signing.

[Presuming the father could spare his precious time.]

Oldrightie said...

Ugly is as ugly does?

subrosa said...

I had to look up that meaning RM, but that still wouldn't matter. As long as the mother agreed who the father was then he could sign the certificate - think that's English law.

subrosa said...

Priorities indeed. Shows a lot about the man Apogee.

subrosa said...

My thoughts when I read about it Joe.

subrosa said...

Of course he is Incoming. Wonder how he'd feel if his own father hadn't bothered, but in those days it only required one parent to register the birth I think and put mother and father on it.

subrosa said...

John I'm sure you'll be proved correct.

subrosa said...

I read what actually happened K and his partner returned saying he had to go along and sign too. He didn't. He couldn't be bothered because he was 'busy'.

K, forgive me for being old-fashioned, but in my day nobody forgot to go and register their child's birth. I can't believe these days, even though the 'modern' way is to have children before making a public commitment, a father can't go along and sign a form.

I'm not picking on his policies as I haven't heard any K. I'm picking on his morals.

subrosa said...

I think that's strange too EP. I also find his priorities strange.

subrosa said...

I wonder what the Jewish community think OR. Although he says he's a non-believer, I'm told he's still Jewish and can't deny that.

Dramfineday said...

That's an interesting point SR - is his partner Jewish too? In which case the community can't be too happy but if she's not is this another case of double standards?

subrosa said...

I've no idea about her Dram but either way I see Judism as a patriarchal religion. The community won't be happy either way Dram. The man may find that out sooner or later.

Related Posts with Thumbnails