When Sara (names in this story are changed to protect the sources’ identities) takes her daughter April out anywhere in Taiwan, she’s frequently asked the same question: “Is your husband Taiwanese?”
Sara is white, and April has unmistakably Asian features.
“My wife is Taiwanese,” she replies.
Photo: Tien Yu-hua, Taipei Times
If asked, she may then clarify that April is her biological child, Taiwanese by blood, and has two moms.
This often creates more confusion, but it is a difficult reality for Sara, her wife Dana and April. While Dana has adopted April, the child does not have Taiwanese (Republic of China) nationality despite both of her parents’ desire that April grow up Taiwanese.
It is also the issue behind a lawsuit they filed against the Ministry of the Interior (MOI), with the help of the Taiwan Alliance to Promote Civil Partnership Rights (TAPCPR). The government has repeatedly refused to recognize April’s right to citizenship, which her parents feel she has had since birth.
Photo courtesy of TAPCPR
The obstacle set by the MOI isn’t that Sara is an American citizen, nor is it that April is not Dana’s biological child. The only issue is that they are a same-sex couple.
If a heterosexual married couple has a child, and one parent has Taiwanese nationality, the government considers that child to be a citizen as well. In other words, if Sara were married to a Taiwanese man at the time of April’s birth, but April was not that man’s biological daughter, the MOI would still consider him the father, and April Taiwanese from birth. It wouldn’t even be a question.
In fact, Sara and Dana feel that adoption shouldn’t have been necessary, per se.
“Heterosexual couples who use donors to conceive don’t have to go through the adoption process,” Sara said. “I’ve always wanted to have a baby, and Dana wanted to [as well] … but I feel they don’t see Dana as a legitimate parent.”
CONTRADICTING RESPONSES
When Sara and Dana set out to conceive, they inquired initially about whether their child would be able to claim Taiwanese citizenship. They met with a lawyer and even asked the MOI, and were led to believe that Sara carrying the child, with Dana as an adoptive parent, would be possible.
“We talked through everything to make sure we had all our ducks in a row,” Sara said. “We knew it was going to be a thing.”
As IVF remains illegal for same-sex couples in Taiwan, many go abroad to access such treatments. Sara and Dana chose an at-home option with a private donor, a Taiwanese man in their social circle whom they trusted and who was willing to help.
Once April was born, the family was given very different answers. According to the MOI, Sara being American on a spousal visa and Dana being an adoptive parent rendered April as an American, not Taiwanese.
This is the answer they received at every turn. First, Dana got a call from the government informing Dana that her baby had not yet been registered as a foreigner. Dana informed them that April was not a foreigner; once she was adopted she’d be Taiwanese.
“They were like, no, she won’t,” Sara explained. “They said she’s American [and] under Taiwanese law, if you qualify for a nationality then you are that nationality. April qualifies for US nationality, so in Taiwan’s eyes she’s American.”
The adoption was approved soon after, which required classes and court appearances for Dana, a home visit and criminal and financial checks. First, they applied to the Taipei City Government for the childbirth subsidy new parents receive, but were rejected as April and Sara are listed as a foreign spouse and child on Dana’s household registration.
The official rejection came in May, and their lawyer drafted a letter to the MOI in June.
“[Our lawyer] argued that under Taiwan’s current law, April is Taiwanese. Taiwan’s current law says if at the time of birth you have a Taiwanese parent, you are Taiwanese. And arguably, you could and should say that at the time of birth, April had a Taiwanese parent, because Dana has been her parent. Before she was conceived, Dana was her parent.”
The next rejection was almost immediate: the MOI replied that as they consider April a foreigner, the parentage issue is not within their area of purview. This is when Sara and Dana began their lawsuit, claiming essentially that as April has the right to Taiwanese nationality from birth, it is under the MOI’s purview to consider the impact of same-sex marriage inequality on her access to that right.
NATIONALITY MATTERS
Sara and Dana aren’t the only family in Taiwan facing the same predicament.
“We became friends with [another couple],” Sara said, “and that was the situation with their son. It sucks to know someone else is in the same boat, but it’s also comforting. Someone understands.”
Of course, all the MOI would need to do to consider April Taiwanese — thus making this issue very much their responsibility — is to treat same-sex couples equally to heterosexual couples. Since passing same-sex marriage legislation in 2019, Taiwan has inched closer to this ideal of equality, allowing most international same-sex couples to marry even if the foreign partner’s country doesn’t recognize same-sex unions, and allowing same-sex parents to both adopt a non-biological child.
In terms of access to fertility treatments and some cases of nationality, however, equality remains elusive.
The issue of April’s nationality creates consequences, both now and in the future. April was stateless for a period, as the US government requested a Taiwanese household registration she didn’t have in order to process her paperwork.
“It’s very important to us that April is Taiwanese,” Sara said. “We’re lifers here … [her] nationality will impact her schooling, career, vote, sense of belonging, ability to participate in politics and civil society ... It’s especially heartbreaking. How are we going to explain this to her?
“It impacts us financially [too],” she added, in reference to the childbirth subsidy they didn’t receive.
ONLY FEASIBLE OPTION
Sara noted that their situation can be difficult for others to understand. If Dana had chosen to carry April, there would be no question of her nationality, but Dana did not want to be pregnant, and their communication with the government led them to believe Sara giving birth wouldn’t be an issue. As their donor is Taiwanese, claiming him as the birth father would have also circumvented this issue. He could have then put April on his household registration before ‘disowning’ her, allowing Dana to adopt her. Although the law has since been changed, when they chose to conceive, they couldn’t both adopt a Taiwanese child.
“That’s a crazy option,” Sara emphasized. “Besides being difficult for everybody, that puts [the donor] in a bad position with his family, who is more traditional … his family may feel he betrayed his bloodline by giving someone else his sperm. We did call and ask, we were open to it … he was very sorry but said he had to stay anonymous. It’s important we respect [that].”
Despite their troubles, Sara and Dana don’t blame the government for the initial misunderstanding, and have strong faith in Taiwan and its ability to move closer to true equality for its LGBTQ+ citizens and residents.
“It’s one of those cases of bureaucracy where everyone has a different answer. Even [our lawyer] thought it would be OK. But when we actually went to do it, they decided, oh no. It wasn’t malicious,” Sara noted.
“As a queer family, we feel Taiwan is extremely friendly and safe,” Sara said. “I want people to know our story because I think public support matters in Taiwan. People are supportive of equality with same sex families but they don’t realize it’s not there.”
Dec. 9 to Dec. 15 When architect Lee Chung-yao (李重耀) heard that the Xinbeitou Train Station was to be demolished in 1988 for the MRT’s Tamsui line, he immediately reached out to the owner of Taiwan Folk Village (台灣民俗村). Lee had been advising Shih Chin-shan (施金山) on his pet project, a 52-hectare theme park in Changhua County that aimed to showcase traditional Taiwanese architecture, crafts and culture. Shih had wanted to build all the structures from scratch, but Lee convinced him to acquire historic properties and move them to the park grounds. Although the Cultural
Supplements are no cottage industry. Hawked by the likes of the Kardashian-Jenner clan, vitamin gummies have in recent years found popularity among millennials and zoomers, who are more receptive to supplements in the form of “powders, liquids and gummies” than older generations. Gwyneth Paltrow’s Goop — no stranger to dubious health trends — sells its own line of such supplements. On TikTok, influencers who shill multivitamin gummies — and more recently, vitamin patches resembling cutesy, colorful stickers or fine line tattoos — promise glowing skin, lush locks, energy boosts and better sleep. But if it’s real health benefits you’re after, you’re
The Taipei Times reported last week that housing transactions fell 15.3 percent last month, to under 20,000 units. However, the market boomed for the first eight months of the year, and observers expect it to show growth for the year as a whole. The fall was due to Central Bank intervention. “The negative impact of credit controls grew evident for the third straight month,” said Sinyi Realty Inc (信義房屋) research manager Tseng Ching-ter (曾敬德), according to the report. Central Bank Governor Yang Chin-long (楊金龍) in October said that the Central Bank implemented selective credit controls in September to cool the housing
Bitcoin topped US$100,000 for the first time this week as a massive rally in the world’s most popular cryptocurrency, largely accelerated by the election of Donald Trump, rolls on. The cryptocurrency officially rose six figures Wednesday night, just hours after the president-elect said he intends to nominate cryptocurrency advocate Paul Atkins to be the next chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Bitcoin has soared since Trump won the US presidential election on Nov. 5. The asset climbed from US$69,374 on Election Day, hitting as high as US$103,713 Wednesday, according to CoinDesk. And the latest all-time high arrives just two years after
RSS