Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Five Adults And A Baby: Is This A Family?
Five Adults And A Baby: Is This A Family?
Sep 14, 2025 12:11 AM

Five adults (three men, two women) in the Netherlands are having a child together, and plan to raise said child together. I know this is a little tricky so let me explain. Jaco and Sjoerd (those are the guys) and Daantje and Dewi (the women) are all homosexual. They’ve known each other for 10 years. Then there is Sean, who is the third person in Jaco and Sjoerd’s relationship. They would marry him, but cannot legally.

The five folks want a child. So (and if you want to read exactly how they did it, you can, but for now let’s just leave it at this) Daantje is now carrying “their” baby.

Five parents with equal rights and responsibilities, divided across two households—those are the terms of the agreement that we all signed and had notarized,” says Dewi. They had to do this because, legally speaking, the Netherlands isn’t quite ready for multi-parenthood just yet. A child can still only have a maximum of two legal parents and, in a marriage, those parents are usually the biological mother and her husband or wife. However, the biological mother is also allowed to appoint someone else as the second legal parent.

The laws surrounding parental rights have improved significantly for gay parents in the Netherlands over the past few years, but the issue of multi-parenthood is still plicated one. In the case of this particular five-parent family, Jaco has taken on the role of legal parent number two—replacing Dewi, who initially held the position because of her marriage to Daantje.

“We wanted to make sure that there was one legal parent in both households, because we’re splitting the upbringing equally,” explains Dewi.

I have no idea how this is going to work. I’m sure the five of them have sat down and talked about different scenarios and how they’ll handle it: who will stay home from work when the little darling is sick, and who will take said darling to the dentist and such. But I have no idea how this is going to work.

I have no idea how this is going to work for the darling child. Is this kid really going to bond “equally” with three men and two women? Is the kid even going to know he/she is supposed to consider each of these people equally mom, mom, dad, dad, and dad?

The adults think so:

When I [reporterNoor Spanjer] ask if they’ve read about attachment psychology in young children, Sjoerd tells me that a friend of his is writing a doctorate on the subject: “She says the main thing is consistency in the family, and that is something we can offer.”

“The world of a baby gets bigger over time, but in the initial stages a baby can attach to about five people—so that works out perfectly for us,” says Dewi.

“So that works out perfectly for us.” Indeed. The adults have this all figured out, and it “works out perfectly for us.” The kid – well, whatever. It’s really the wants, desires and wishes of the adults that are important here.

Maybe these folks should have had a long talk with Oscar Robert Lopez before they decided that they would equally parent a child together. Lopez was raised by lesbian mothers, and he calls himself a survivor. Why?

It is abusive to tell a child, “We are your moms” or “we are your dads,” and then expect the child never to feel the loss of such important icons, in addition to the injury of having been severed from at least one, and possibly both, biological parents—not because it was necessary, but because the two adults insisted on the arrangement. The lessons children learn from this undermine selfhood: might makes right, little people are subject to the whims of self-serving parents, and powerful people can impose “love” on weaker beings with money or political influence over adoption agencies, family courts, sperm banks, and surrogate mothers.

None of these problems would arise if we lived in a world where gay people saw children not as modity for purchase but rather as an obligation requiring sacrifices (i.e., you give up your gay partner instead of making your kid give up a parent of the opposite sex, because you’re the adult.)

What we have here is a bunch of adults acting like children. They want a kid, so they get pregnant. There is no thought to what is best FOR THE CHILD. Instead, we have “so that works out perfectly FOR US.”

What we have here is five tall children getting ready to raise a child. What we have here is five emotionally-immature people who have refused adulthood, and opted for what “works out perfectly for us.” What we have here is a disastrous situation for a child. But the five adults are really only in it for themselves.

This is not a family; this is pre-arranged child abuse.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Review: Defending Constantine
We’ll have the Winter 2011 issue of Religion & Liberty online later this week and you won’t want to miss it. Subscribe here. We’re previewing the issue on the PowerBlog with a book review that, because of space limitations, had to be shortened. This post publishes it in full. Constantine and the Great Transformation Defending Constantine by Peter J. Leithart (IVP Academic, 2010) Reviewed by Johannes L. Jacobse The argument that the lifting of the persecutions of early Christians and...
Budgets, the Church, and the Welfare State
In this mentary, which will appear tomorrow, I summarize and explore a bit more fully some of the discussion surrounding evangelical and religious engagement of the budget battles in Washington. One of my core concerns is that the approaches seem to assume too much ongoing and primary responsibility on the part of the federal government for providing direct material assistance to the poor. As “A Call for Intergenerational Justice” puts it, “To reduce our federal debt at the expense of...
Abortion and Intergenerational Justice
I’m not sure I have ever really encountered the term intergenerational justice before this discussion over “A Call for Intergenerational Justice,” at least in any substantive way. This unfamiliarity is what lay behind my initial caveat regarding the term, my concern that it not be understood as “code for something else.” The Call itself provides a decent definition of the concept, or at least of its implications: “…that one generation must not benefit or suffer unfairly at the cost of...
‘A Call for Intergenerational Justice’ and the Question of Economic Growth
While there is much to applaud in the Center for Public Justice and Evangelicals for Social Action’s “A Call for Intergenerational Justice,” the lack of discussion of the problem of economic growth is troubling. I believe Don Peck is correct when he writes in The Atlantic: If it persists much longer, this era of high joblessness will likely change the life course and character of a generation of young adults—and quite possibly those of the children behind them as well....
Archbishop Chaput: The American experience and global religious liberty
A brilliant assessment of where we are. (HT: American Orthodox Institute Observer). Subject to the governor of the universe: The American experience and global religious liberty March 1, 2011 – Most Rev. Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap., Archbishop of Denver, addressed the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace and World Affairs at Georgetown University. A friend once said – I think shrewdly — that if people want to understand the United States, they need to read two documents. Neither one is...
Opposing Views: America’s Debt Crisis and ‘A Call for Intergenerational Justice’
Last week’s issuance of “A Call for Intergenerational Justice: A Christian Proposal on the American Debt Crisis” has occasioned a good bit of discussion on the topic, both here at the PowerBlog and around various other blogs and social media sites. It has been interesting to see the reaction that ments about the Call have generated. Many have said that I simply misunderstood or misread the document. I have taken the time to reread the document and do some reassessment...
Shane Claiborne’s Budget Babbling
Writing for the Huffington Post, Shane Claiborne is also asking “What Would Jesus Cut?” I’m still opposed to the whole notion of reducing Christ to budget director, as my earlier post points out. But Jesus as Secretary of Defense of the United States or rather, Jesus as secretary of peace as proposed by Congressman Dennis Kucinich is equally unhelpful. Mark Tooley, president of IRD, has already weighed in on Shane Claiborne’s not so brilliant drafting of Jesus for president. As...
Jeff Jacoby: Jesus won’t tell them what to cut
Writing in the Boston Globe, columnist Jeff Jacoby says that a “more fundamental problem with the “What Would Jesus Cut?’’ campaign is its planted axiom that Jesus would want Congress to do anything at all.” As a believing Jew and a conservative, I don’t share the religious outlook or political priorities of Wallis and his co-signers. But you don’t have to be Christian or liberal to believe that in God’s eyes, a society is judged above all by its concern...
Unintended Consequences and Wind Turbines
With the surge in oil prices, there’s renewed interest in alternative energy options. Numerous countries have gradually taken steps to promoting renewable or clean energy technologies, and it seems the United States is drifting more towards favoring alternative energy options as the Obama Administration is looking at banning off shore drilling along the continental shelf until 2012 and beyond. However, before we move farther down this road, a critical analysis of the pros and cons is a must. A more...
Taking His Name in Vain: What Would Jesus Cut?
Ray’s post pointed to something that’s been bugging me about Jim Wallis’ “What Would Jesus Cut?” campaign. As with the “What Would Jesus Drive?” campaign (“Transportation is a moral issue.” What isn’t these days?), Wallis’ campaign assumes the moral high ground by appropriating the Holy Name of Jesus Christ to advance his highly politicized, partisan advocacy. Jesus es an advertising slogan. And what is implicit here is that those who oppose Wallis are somehow at odds with the Gospel of...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved