View this post on Instagram
Three gay dads in a relationship with one another have opened up about their family life and path to parenthood. The men made history in 2017 when they became the first ‘throuple’ to all be listed as fathers on their child’s birth certificate in California.
One of the men has now written a memoir about their experiences. They’re engaging in numerous media interviews to promote the book and raise awareness about same-sex parenting.
The author of Three Men And A Baby is Ian Jenkins, a San Diego-based doctor and university professor.
He has been with his partner, Alan Mayfield, for the past 17 years. They opened up their relationship to include a third man, Jeremy Allen-Hodges, eight years ago.
The men have two kids: Daughter Piper, who is three, and son Parker, who is 18 months. Both were born using donated eggs and surrogates.
Related: Anderson Cooper shows off son Wyatt on the cover of People magazine
All three men were listed on Piper’s birth certificate after a California Court ruled them able to do so. Because of this intervention, all three are also listed on Parker’s birth certificate, and other poly families can also do the same – in California, at least.
To their kids, Alan is known as Dada, Ian is Papa and Jeremy is Daddy.
All three men appeared yesterday on The Morning Show in Australia to talk about becoming parents.
Gay ‘throuple’ who created legal history after being allowed to name three dads on their children’s birth certificates speak out about their unique family 👨🏻👨🏻👨🏻👶🏻👶🏻 pic.twitter.com/1rDF0p2Fi3
— The Morning Show (@morningshowon7) February 17, 2021
Although surrogacy can come with challenges for any would-be parent, the issue of Piper’s birth certificate was more tricky for the men to negotiate.
“With surrogacy, you have to have a parentage order from the court declaring who are going to be the legal parents,” said Alan.
“In the beginning, we weren’t sure that we could have all three of us on the birth certificate so it became a court process where we argued in court.
“It was a pretty interesting, tense courtroom scene where at first it seemed like we were not going to be granted that, and we asked to speak in court and plead our viewpoint, and the judge ultimately changed her mind and granted us legal parentage of our child before she was born.”
Ian told HuffPost: “We all gave very tearful testimonies about why we needed to become parents. You could see the emotion on the judge’s face. She looked at all the options in front of her and found a way to use existing laws to give us the first birth certificate of its kind anywhere.”
Part of the reason they felt strongly about all being listed as parents – besides being the reality of the situation – was because of the potential benefits for their child.
“We all have jobs, we all have pensions with our jobs and health insurance and those kinds of things, and if you’re not listed as your child’s legal parents, then they’re not able to receive those benefits,” Jeremy told Good Morning.
On his decision to write a book, Ian said, “We wanted everyone to know that love makes a family, and families may look different, but if you care about your kids and you’re doing everything you can to give them the best possible childhood, that’s what matters.
“We wanted people who are in non-traditional families to know that there could be more legal protections available to them and help keep this process moving so that more parents would have the kind of protection we’re enjoying.”
Ian has little time for critics who say his family is not “normal”. He recently told LGBTQSD News: “I’m pretty sure it’s lifelong monogamy that’s weird.
“Our culture is filled with all of these stories about longing and infidelity. It’s natural for us to feel affections for more than one person. What’s exotic is that we actually did it — we made a life many people think of as an unattainable dream, but we’re ordinary people otherwise. We have the same conversations about what to have for dinner, what to watch on TV.”
He added, “Many parents long for another partner — more love, more help with the kids — we just went out and made it happen!”
In a recent interview with Echo Mag, Ian talked more about his and Alan’s decision to open up their relationship. They said it came about after around “four years” of discussions, and led to some trial-and-error dating experiences.
“I think the real issue was kind of figuring out what kind of person (we) would be comfortable with and when we first started talking about this, I think he was more comfortable with the idea of someone who couldn’t really compete as a mate.
“(Alan) felt better with the idea of someone that we didn’t really think was going to be a long-term partner, and it turns out that the people who are probably not likely long-term partners are also just not a good fit for us.”
Related: WATCH: Andy Cohen’s son reacts to a lifelike doll of his father
He said they dated a few men but didn’t “click” with any, until he met 6’5” zookeeper, Jeremy. At first, Jeremy was not interested in dating a couple, but as the three men became firm friends and began spending more and more time together, a relationship together seemed to develop naturally: one that all three were comfortable with.
“We’re pretty tame and ordinary people,” said Ian. “The house is very much like every other house that’s raising two kids as best as they possibly can with the right values and making them feel nourished and wanted to set them up for success. It’s just that there’s three dads instead of two, or a mom and a dad.”
Three Dads And A Baby will be published in March.
This article includes links that may result in a small affiliate share for purchased products, which helps support independent LGBTQ+ media.
Josh447
Impressive.
cuteguy
This “throuple” thing is just more ammo for those far right losers who are against same sex relationships. I personally do not understand this throuple thing. Someone will always be the third wheel. We fought so hard and so long for equal rights to have it taken away bc of this nonsense
Cam
But this is the same argument that was used to kick lesbians out of the women’s rights movements, or anybody different out of the early gay rights movements.
Backlash by bigots shouldn’t be our reason for doing anything.
trsxyz
@cuteguy I don’t get the throuple thing either, and I agree with you about one member becoming a third wheel at some point.
MISTERJETT
here’s a thought. you live how you want to live and everyone else will live how they want to live with no judgment from you or anyone else. i’m thinking they weren’t concerned with your acceptance when they decided how they want to live. maybe, just maybe they’re happy with the way they’re living. that’s all that counts.
Monkey1
Misterjett, I think most people don’t care how these guys live, ultimately, but why bring kids into the mix? Now these kids have 3 parents, and if there’s a split between them, either a 2 way or 3 way break up, the problems will start. Custody and child support are going to be even more complicated. If all three split up how will the kids be treated? One week with papa 1, next week with papa 2, then the week after that with papa 3? Kids of divorce sometimes have enough trouble being shuffled between two homes. What if the split is not amicable? You have 3 parents fighting for custody. It’s ridiculous that a judge would give in to this.
masterwill7
Seriously, if you judgy gay’s can’t even bring up the decency to have respect for this??? You all have to understand, these guys do NOT owe you or anyone else an explanation!!!! They live how they want to live, and it’s great a judge went with them! Whatever you feel about this doesn’t mean shit! Period! Why do all of you think you have a right to judge this situation, because you don’t! Live and let live, that’s all that matters..
Monkey1
See, this story really upsets me. They want to live together, really nothing anyone can do, but now they want to change laws to accommodate themselves and set themselves us as victims. It’s ridiculous.
Cam
@Monkey1
Annnnnd, right on schedule the right wing troll with it’s newer screename is here to cry about “Changing laws to accommodate themselves”.
Oh, you mean the way Kim Davis tried to change the laws so she DIDN’T have to give a marriage certificate to LGBTQ couples? Or the way Trump tried to change the laws so that non Christians couldn’t get into the country?
As I just told one of your other screenames, your troll game is weak and tired.
ingyaom
I guess this will just make the custody battle that much more difficult following the inevitable split-up…
Cam
I don’t get the throuple thing and tend to roll my eyes every few years when Queerty posts an article by some new throughple that goes on and on about how they’ve discovered a new way of having a relationship blah blah blah blah (I checked back and one of the throuples from a few years back broke up soon after the article came out).
However with this group, getting their names as parents so that their benefits and pensions go to the kids is sensible and the fact that they’ve been together for 8 years seems to indicate staying power. Not my cup of tea but more power to them. and I hope they and the kids are happy.
Openminded
Very thought provoking story. The only negative takeaway I see in the story is how they implied they were originally looking for a “short term” third. I’ll never understand anyone who wants to go into long term commitments, like child rearing, yet are willing to do it with a “short term” partner. I’m not doing a good job of explaining this. I’ve had so many friends state after a divorce that they “had hoped to get a good 6-8 years out of the relationship”.
joeboyle49
I DON’T UNDERSTAND HOW LONG THEY THINK THEY WILL STAY TOGETHER BECAUSE I KNEW A COUPLE WHO LET A THRID IN AND THE AGREEMENT WAS NTHEY WOULDN’T MAKE NLOVE TO EITHER ONE WHEN ONE OF THDEM WAS GONE ANF LOOK ALL OF A SUDDEN ONE OF THE COUPLE IWAS HAVING SEX NWITH THE THIRD PERSON WHILE THE IOTHER ONE WAS AT WORK AND WHEN THE OTHER OINEW FOUND OUYT THE OTHER 2 WERE HAVING LOTS OF SEX WHILE HE WAS AT WORK THEY SPLIT UP THEY WEREN’T TOGETHGER AS A 3SOME FOR VERY LONG BECAUSE IT SEEMED ONE OF THE COUPLE WAS ALWAYS HAVEING SEX WITH THE THIRDONE SO IT DIDN’T WORK SO YES THE THROUPLE HAVE BEEN TOGETHER FOR AWHILE BUT WHAT H8APPENXS IF THEY ISPLIT AND WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE KIDS?
Prinny
Wow so much hate for triads on this site
ShiningSex
because most don’t last. i’ve known three friends that each had been in such a relationship and none worked past two years.
It’s difficult enough for two to make it work (in every sexuality aspect) much less have a third. Plus thrown in a third to deal with a child.
I have absolutely NO issues with us gays having children (God only knows why anyone would want children) but adding a third and dealing with that on top of a third really seems doomed. If they can make it work, great.
Albert Johnson
Our Gay world is now expanding to the existence of and more acceptance of polyamorous relationships. This throuple or triad can do what they want with their lives and raise their children as they see fit. Leave them alone. It’s a news story on a gay site. Not an article in ‘Final Judgement Times’.
Cam
Odd that you seem so enraged that people are commenting on people who went on multiple TV shows.
Joshua333
Good on them. At least they’re happy. Isn’t that the most important thing?
andrewl
Well, actually no, their happiness is not the most important thing here. It’s the well-being of their children that is the most important factor. Now I cannot judge or comment on this with relation to their kids that is for the children themselves and experts. Though it is always said a tripod is the most unstable political arrangement.
hotdogla
Okay,
missvamp
oh look- judging what you don’t understand & don’t have. all of you are probably single & miserable. or you’re mono & miserable. i’m poly & happy. stop being haters. my husband is straight, my bf & i are pansexual. my marriage has been open the entire 10 years. my husband & bf are half my age. it was only fair to them to let it be open. my husband was 20 when we met. my bf was 23. why would i not allow them to keep exploring? why wouldn’t i want to keep having options when i’m not straight & none of us is vanilla? open & poly works for all 3 of us & we’re very happy.
Monkey1
I think the bigger issue is bringing kids into the mix, that is when it gets messy. Espcially if things don’t work ing, in the case of these guys, and now there are 3 parents going to court for child support, visitation, etc.
SumSay
@Monkey1 Have you never heard of the proverb “it takes a village to raise a child”? As long as the kids have a stable support system, they’ll be fine. Even if things don’t work out between the parents, if they’re good parents they’ll most likely do whatever it takes to ensure the children are cared for. That’s what any parent, regardless of how many there are, wants right?
Monkey1
It actually does not take a village to raise a child, the more people in the mix the harder it is. I’ve seen couples who were “dream couples” become enemies during divorce and drag the kids through the courts and use them to get at the person they now despise. Too many people don’t think ahead and consider what will happen at the worst of times, because they’re only thinking of the fun.
iminheatlikeacat
Putting aside the whole “throuple” thing, I’m confused and find it a bit concerning how this was even allowed. A birth certificate is a legal document for a child, not the parent, and this one has information on there that’s entirely and knowingly untrue.
Monkey1
You could be right… they only say that the judge “She looked at all the options in front of her and found a way to use existing laws to give us the first birth certificate of its kind anywhere.” So who knows what happened there.
Once they split up there will be fights over who is the real parent/s, and they might even claim the courts did they wrong so one of them needs to be left off and not give them visitation… they opened up a HUGE can of worms. Or more like snakes.
iminheatlikeacat
Monkey1, the splitting up argument is a presumptuous one – the “original” couple have been together for almost two decades, the “third” partner for almost one decade. Not to say a split is impossible, but it’s not like this is a few months or even a few years situation. My concern is only on the precedent this sets. It’s all very well that they say “the judge found a way to use existing laws to give us a birth certificate of its own kind” but that sounds like a lot of loopholing going on to me. With that aside, as already said, this is a (supposed) legal document that was awarded with knowingly false and incorrect information on it. A birth certificate is for the person, the child. It’s not for the parents benefit. From a personal view, I find it quite selfish, but from a wide of view, I think there needs to be reform to this, possibly one birth certificate recorded for all purposes birth certificates are used for and then the ability to amend an existing one for personal purposes with the original stating in tact. It’s a crime to falsify a birth certificate so how is it that a judge can grant one with three fathers on it? Hypothetically, would the child(ren), in future, have the right to sue the state of California for providing them with an illegal document? Messy.
cheks
A birth certificate is not a legal document only for the child. It establishes the child’s place of birth for naturalization, but furthermore it establishes who the child’s legal parents are. There are often cases were a child’s birth certificate is amended. Most often in the case of adoption, like when a dad remarries after his wife dies, the “new mom or dad” has to adopt the kids, it doesn’t happen automatically after people get married. This is especially the case for insurance purposes, medical authority, beneficiary purposes, tax purposes, etc. Or any time you need to prove you are the parent of the child.
Fang
Is this opening up a Pandora’s box? I know this is a case about birth certificates and not marriage, but they both fall under the umbrella of family law and it’s easy to see how one may lead to the other. Polygamy and birth certificate limitation laws do well for gender equality, knowing that women are often more vulnerable to religious cults and their nefarious multi-spousal practices. If gay men begin subverting these laws for their *choice* to have multiple romantic partners, there are real implications to vulnerable women. That leaves a bad taste in my mouth, honestly, especially knowing that these cases are almost exclusively in favor of the affluent.