Elton’s right- Dolce is wrong, wrong, wrong

Elton’s right- Dolce is wrong, wrong, wrong

Children are children. They are entitled to be loved, cared for and cherished, however they were conceived. They ought to be protected. That is their parents’ and society’s duty.

Their parents also ought to be recognised. There are many myths and misconceptions about who undertakes surrogacy and IVF. Should the single woman, survivor of cancer, with no uterus as a result, be vilified for desiring to have a child? Should she be told that due to some quirk of nature that she cannot have children that it is beyond the laws of nature to have children, and therefore she should just give up? That it is somehow shameful and wrong her desire to have a child?

The call by Elton John for a consumer boycott of Dolce and Gabbana is well founded. In an interview with Panorama magazine, Dolce and Gabbana talk of their recent promotion, focussed on the family. Domenico Dolce said: “”I call children of chemistry, synthetic children. Wombs for rent, seeds selected from a catalog.”

Dolce then said about whether he wanted to be a father: ” I’m gay, I can not have a child. I believe that we can not have everything in life, if there is not to say that there must be. It is also good to deprive yourself of something. Life has its natural course, there are things that must not be changed. And one of these is the family.”

Stefano Gabbano said: ” We understand that the family is not a fad. It is a sense of the supernatural.”

Elton John, outraged at the slight, has called for a consumer boycott. Elton said on his Instagram account:

 “How dare you refer to my beautiful children as ‘synthetic.’ And shame on you for wagging your judgemental little fingers at IVF — a miracle that has allowed legions of loving people, both straight and gay, to fulfil their dream of having children. Your archaic thinking is out of step with the times, just like your fashions. I shall never wear Dolce and Gabbana ever again. #BoycottDolceGabbana”.

As Chief Judge Pascoe from the Federal Circuit Court said recently:

“What a child is entitled to is loving parents. The fact that people are heterosexual does not necessarily make them good parents.

“As we saw in the baby Gammy case, that was to all intents and purposes a heterosexual couple but it would be difficult to say that the man in that relationship was a suitable parent….You do not have to sit in family law for long to see that there are both good and bad heterosexual parents. The real issue is: are these people who will love, protect and care for the child? I think it is really important that we do not focus on issues like the sexuality of intending parents but that we focus on the rights and the protection of the child, and also the rights, care and protection of the birth mother.”
 

Request an Appointment
Fill in the form below to find out if you have a claim.
Request an Appointment - Stephen Page
Things to Read, Watch & Listen

Why adoption has become “institutionally invisible” in Queensland

Queensland’s child protection system is facing an urgent and deeply troubling question: why are children who cannot safely return home being left in state care for years, often moving from placement to placement, without genuine consideration of adoption? The recent Child Safety Inquiry has put that question squarely on the table. Its findings are confronting.… Read More »Why adoption has become “institutionally invisible” in Queensland

Queensland sperm donor family limits explained

  Queensland’s new sperm donor family limits were meant to provide sensible safeguards for children conceived through donor treatment. Instead, Queensland Health has adopted an interpretation that appears to split a female same sex couple into two separate families. That position is difficult to reconcile with the law, common sense, and the lived reality of… Read More »Queensland sperm donor family limits explained

South Australia surrogacy agreements: are they unlawful?

South Australia takes a distinctly narrow approach to surrogacy agreements. The issue is not simply whether a proposed arrangement is altruistic, or whether everyone involved has acted with the best of intentions. Under the Surrogacy Act 2019 (SA), the first question is whether the arrangement falls into the category of a lawful surrogacy agreement. That… Read More »South Australia surrogacy agreements: are they unlawful?

Family Law Section Law Council of Australia Award
Member of Queensland law society
Family law Practitioners Association
International Academy of Family Lawyers - IAFL
Mediator Standards Board