This House Believes That Biological parenthood should matter in custody hearings.

Custody hearings are a special type of decision-making forum which take place within the family courts. In a these cases, judges are empowered to make decisions about residence (where the child should live) most often when parents separate or when children are born to parents who are not in a relationship. The hearing must also consider contact (how much time the non-residential parent can spend with the child) despite residence agreement. Judges can order direct contact (either overnight or daytime), supervised contact (at special centres) or indirect contact (by telephone, letter or email). Residential parents who refuse to allow such contact face a range of sanctions including prison in extreme cases. When making decisions, courts take into account all available information about the child and both parents. Biological parenthood generally refers to the mother who gave birth to the child and the parents who are genetically related to the child. This stands in opposition to social parents who care for the child: adoptive parents, stepparents, partners within homosexual couples who have undertaken IVF, etc. The growth of non-traditional families has meant that this definition of parenthood has gained increasing prominence. The term gestational parenthood is used in circumstances in which a child's gestational mother differs from its genetic mother — as happens in egg (or embryo) donation and gestational surrogacy when a different woman carries and gives birth to the child. In this case up to three women have claims to parenthood of the child – the egg donor (the genetic parent), the surrogate (the gestational parent), and the intended mother (the social parent). Such cases and issues appear in courts in the UK and the US as well as across Europe but this discussion will focus on UK law. The debate tackles the issue of how important biological parenthood should be in custody hearings. The proposition argues that biological parenthood is of great importance and should be prioritised over the other constructions of parenthood in the decision-making process of the judge. While the opposition argues for equality between constructions or even priority to those other formulations of parenthood.