Does a second female parent wrongly named on a birth certificate acquire PR for a child?

This question arose in a recent family court case Re X (female partner non-acquisition of parental responsibility) [2026] EWFC 252 (B) https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/OJ/2026/252.html The Judge gave a careful judgment applying the relevant legal principles to the case in the context of the criteria under S43 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act that have to be satisfied for a second female parent to be registered on a child's birth certificate. If those requirements are not met, the birth registration is invalid and the second female parent does not acquire PR under that route.

Facts Relevant to Parentage and Registration

The parties 'AR' and 'BM' began a relationship in early 2023, when BM was already pregnant following intercourse with LY. X was born in 2023 at R Hospital, with AR present. Around six weeks after birth, BM and AR registered X's birth and AR was entered on the certificate as "Parent".

Following the breakdown of the relationship, BM alleges coercion and procedural informality at registration, while AR describes thorough questioning by the registrar. The certified birth certificate lists AR under "PARENT" and BM under "MOTHER". It is common ground that X was not conceived via assisted reproduction within the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 scheme.

Legal Framework as to the acquisition of Parental Responsibility

Parental responsibility derives from sections 2, 4, 4ZA and 4A Children Act 1989, with section 3(1) defining its scope.

Section 2 CA 1989 grants automatic parental responsibility to married or civil partner parents, and to an HFEA 2008 parent per sections 42 or 43 in specified cases.

Section 4 CA 1989 allows an unmarried genetic father to acquire parental responsibility by registration, agreement, or court order.

Section 4ZA CA 1989 allows an HFEA 2008 section 43 parent to acquire parental responsibility by registration, agreement, or order.

Registration does not itself determine legal parentage; it is practical evidence only, per P v Q and F [2024] EWCA Civ 878. In Re J (loss of Parental Responsibility) [2026] EWCA Civ 344, the Court of Appeal held only a genetic father can acquire parental responsibility via section 4 registration. McFarlane P endorsed that non-genetic registrants do not acquire parental responsibility and may never have had it.

The Court's Analysis and Decision on Parental Responsibility

The judge held that only an HFEA 2008 section 43 parent can acquire parental responsibility via section 4ZA through registration as "parent". As X was not born via assisted reproduction and AR is not a section 43 parent, AR did not acquire parental responsibility by registration. The court will make a declaration that AR does not have parental responsibility for X. This also meant that AR is not a "parent" for the purposes of Children Act 1989 section 10(4) and therefore is not entitled to apply as of right for a section 8 order and must seek the Court's permission to make an application.

Observations on Registration Practice

The judge expressed concern about possible unlawful practice of registering a non-genetic, non-gestational female partner as "parent" without fulfilling the section 43 criteria. The judgment has been anonymised and sent to the Registrar General, and published on The National Archive to raise awareness of the issues as the Court heard evidence that suggested that the process of registering the birth had not been undertaken by the registrar with due diligence.