Here’s a bit of jaw-dropping news that is not specific to Kumamoto but definitely strikes me as relevant discussions we’ve been having recently.
The opening sentence of the article, which summarizes the ruling, says that a Kobe judge has ruled that a law, currently in force, that allows the husband to declare that a child borne be his wife is not his, but does NOT allow the wife to make such a legal claim, is constitutional. (Insert image of jaw dropping to floor here.) It seems to me that the woman might have some idea of who the father of her baby is (I’m not sure, you know, being a man and all, but I think many women probably notice who it is that they are engaging with when doing the business of baby making) but the woman has no legal right to declare that, if I have understood the ruling correctly – and the judge says this is all constitutional and no problem in terms of equality of the sexes. Someone, please tell me that I’ve misunderstood this. I heard about it on the news today and couldn’t believe my ears. Reading the Japanese text gives me the sinking feeling that I understood the news report correctly the first time.
「妻が産んだ子どもを法律上自分の子どもではないと求める手続きを、夫にだけ認めた民法の規定が、憲法に違反するかどうかが初めて争われた裁判で、神戸地方裁判所は「法律的に子どもの身分の安定を保つもので、合理性がある」として、憲法に違反しないという判断を示しました。 」
– Kirk
http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/20171129/k10011239771000.html