Making the choice of a way of life sociologically understandable

Henrike Hartmann is a freelance journalist and has just successfully completed her bachelor’s thesis on the topic of becoming a parent without a romantic relationship. For her thesis, she interviewed four people from Familyship and shed light on their motivation for co-parenting.

Henrike, you yourself are still quite young, how did you become aware of the topic of co-parenting in the first place?

I would say that personal experiences helped me to question the ideal model of the family based on romantic love early on. For a while, I co-produced a (queer) feminist radio program. For one of my contributions, I dealt with the ideal of romantic love – and the question of whether we can find our security just as well outside of this norm. While looking for interview partners, I came across Familyship and contacted Christine directly! Since then, the topic has stayed with me, I’ve produced another podcast on the subject – and most recently I also researched co-parenting in my bachelor’s thesis.

Is there still an “ideal model” of family today?

Yes, I believe it is indisputable that society’s understanding of “family” is still very much based on the image of the “normal family” – the union of a heterosexual (married) couple and their biological children. The romantic and couple-based reproductive norm also manifests itself in parentage law: the assignment of legal parenthood is still easiest for heterosexual, married parents.

What does it mean if someone wants to become a parent without having a romantic relationship, what family structures are conceivable in this case?

Humans can cope with many things on their own – self-fertilization is not part of the human repertoire. If we wish to have a biological child, this requires “interaction” with a person of complementary fertility in the broadest sense. Ideally, this interaction is based on an arrangement of romantic love – but the necessary interaction can also arise in other ways: If people who wish to have children have the ability to produce eggs, there is the possibility of private or third-party sperm donation. The situation is more difficult for people who produce sperm and wish to have a biological child: Surrogacy can only be realized abroad. Another option is co-parenting: the concept of co-parenting is based on the simple logic of finding a person of complementary fertility who shares the biological desire to have a child. Beyond biological parenthood, there are other options, e.g. adoption, foster parenthood – or taking on responsibility in co- or multi-parenthood.

What were your participants’ motives for opting for co-parenting, can you define similarities or differences?

For the four interviewees, co-parenting was a means to the desired biological child – the desire for family ties was also recognizable in all four interviewees. All interviewees had to deal with circumstances that made it difficult or impossible for them to have a biological child within a romantic relationship. In addition, there were individual emotional motivations that increased the pressure to act for the four interviewees. Co-parenting proved to be the most promising way for the four interviewees to realize the desire for a biological child, which they individually felt was urgent.

What are the circumstances that can block the path to romantic parenthood?

Some people want life in a traditional family so much, but simply can’t find the right partner at their side to start the family they long for. And yet other people have the right partner by their side – but unfortunately, not all couples who love each other can conceive a child together. This applies to most gay or lesbian couples, for example.

How do the participants evaluate their decision to co-parent in retrospect?

What stood out was that for the four interviewees, co-parenting was not something like a dream or an ideal that had always grown inside them, but rather a “plan B”, an “emergency decision”, “the only way it worked” or a “project”. But in the end, this decision led them to their longed-for biological child!

From your scientific perspective, what do you wish for the future of co-parenting?

That not only the differences between co-parenting and the “normal family” are always upheld. The aim of my work was to make the choice of a way of life sociologically comprehensible that turns the current principles of the “normal family” upside down. Despite all the differences that exist between romantic and non-romantic parenthood, they also have one essential thing in common: both are forms of starting a family. And so I would like to see co-parenting seen as exactly that – and for it to be legally legitimized in the future. At best, social science research in this area can lead to the need for a law on shared responsibility no longer being questioned in the future. It would be nice if at some point the majority of society shared the view of the Future Family Forum: “For us, family is wherever people take responsibility for each other on a permanent basis, take care of each other and give each other attention”.

Henrike, thank you for the interview!