Where is Solomon when you need him?

[pappy]

In a nutshell here is the case.

Partner A donates an egg inseminated by donor semen.
Egg is implanted in partner B who gives birth.
Couple splits up 2 years later.
Partner B (birth mother) leaves the country with the baby to Australia.
Partner A (biological mother) tracks down Partner B and sues for custody.

Based on current law in Florida a judge rules that the biological mother (Partner A) has no parental rights but hopes a higher court will overrule him.

Higher court does overrule and gives both mothers parental rights.

Now it goes to the Florida Supreme Court with many social issues at stake.One dissenting judge put it this way,

Quote:The court shouldn't recognize two mothers "unless we are also willing to invalidate laws prohibiting same-sex marriage, bigamy, polygamy or adult incestuous relationships on the same basis," Lawson said.

The AP article is HERE

[PoliticalTiger]

(03-04-2012 04:43 PM)pappy Wrote:  In a nutshell here is the case.

Partner A donates an egg inseminated by donor semen.
Egg is implanted in partner B who gives birth.
Couple splits up 2 years later.
Partner B (birth mother) leaves the country with the baby to Australia.
Partner A (biological mother) tracks down Partner B and sues for custody.

Based on current law in Florida a judge rules that the biological mother (Partner A) has no parental rights but hopes a higher court will overrule him.

Higher court does overrule and gives both mothers parental rights.

Now it goes to the Florida Supreme Court with many social issues at stake.One dissenting judge put it this way,

Quote:The court shouldn't recognize two mothers "unless we are also willing to invalidate laws prohibiting same-sex marriage, bigamy, polygamy or adult incestuous relationships on the same basis," Lawson said.

The AP article is HERE

This dissenting judge, C. Alan Lawson, is a far-right Republican extremist who the hate group Florida Family Policy Council tried to push then governor Charlie Crist into appointing to the Florida Supreme Court. When Crist appointed Circuit Judge James E.C. Perry, a moderate and an African-American to the court instead, the FFPC had a fit.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2009...st-supreme

[pappy]

(03-04-2012 05:48 PM)PoliticalTiger Wrote:  

(03-04-2012 04:43 PM)pappy Wrote:  The AP article is HERE

This dissenting judge, C. Alan Lawson, is a far-right Republican extremist who the hate group Florida Family Policy Council tried to push then governor Charlie Crist into appointing to the Florida Supreme Court. When Crist appointed Circuit Judge James E.C. Perry, a moderate and an African-American to the court instead, the FFPC had a fit.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2009...st-supreme

I would feel more comfortable if this case was coming up in a state like California. In Florida I worry about how this case moves forward.

[PoliticalTiger]

(03-04-2012 05:53 PM)pappy Wrote:  

(03-04-2012 05:48 PM)PoliticalTiger Wrote:  This dissenting judge, C. Alan Lawson, is a far-right Republican extremist who the hate group Florida Family Policy Council tried to push then governor Charlie Crist into appointing to the Florida Supreme Court. When Crist appointed Circuit Judge James E.C. Perry, a moderate and an African-American to the court instead, the FFPC had a fit.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2009...st-supreme

I would feel more comfortable if this case was coming up in a state like California. In Florida I worry about how this case moves forward.

Me too, but the one good thing is that the Florida Supreme Court is fairly moderate, so might even say liberal, especially Republicans. Three of them were appointed by Democrat Lawton Chiles, and the other four by Charlie Crist, who even though he is a Republican, by today's standards, he'd probably be considered a Democrat, at least by Republicans who hate him because he wasn't a rabid right-winger.

I was curious so I did some research and they have to retire at age 70 unless they reach 70 in the middle of their term then they can stay until their term expires. They serve 6 year terms and then must be voted on by the electorate as to whether they should be retained, and they are almost never voted out, so hopefully Rick Scott won't get the chance to appoint anybody to the Florida Supreme Court! The oldest one is 65 years old.

[sandnsea]

Strictly legally speaking, it seems to me that once an egg is donated, rights to it are gone. I don't think a sperm donor can come back and claim his child.

Obviously the best interest of the child indicates shared custody. I don't think you even have to get into marriage laws to conclude that. The legal status of the relationship of the caregivers isn't relevant.

[pappy]

(03-04-2012 08:20 PM)sandnsea Wrote:  Strictly legally speaking, it seems to me that once an egg is donated, rights to it are gone. I don't think a sperm donor can come back and claim his child.

Obviously the best interest of the child indicates shared custody. I don't think you even have to get into marriage laws to conclude that. The legal status of the relationship of the caregivers isn't relevant.

In an ordinary in vitro case your right the egg or sperm donor would give up parental rights but this is also poorly analogous to a surrogate mother case where the surrogate would give up parental rights.

Neither situation really fits here, in my estimation, in that this was intended to be a shared parenting family situation where both the surrogate and egg donor would have rights and be parents.

I don't see any way this can bu ruled against a shared parenting arrangement but there are some very ideological judges now so even if this gets to SCOTUS it could end up in a very bad ruling.

[sandnsea]

(03-05-2012 04:43 AM)pappy Wrote:  

(03-04-2012 08:20 PM)sandnsea Wrote:  Strictly legally speaking, it seems to me that once an egg is donated, rights to it are gone. I don't think a sperm donor can come back and claim his child.

Obviously the best interest of the child indicates shared custody. I don't think you even have to get into marriage laws to conclude that. The legal status of the relationship of the caregivers isn't relevant.

In an ordinary in vitro case your right the egg or sperm donor would give up parental rights but this is also poorly analogous to a surrogate mother case where the surrogate would give up parental rights.

Neither situation really fits here, in my estimation, in that this was intended to be a shared parenting family situation where both the surrogate and egg donor would have rights and be parents.

I don't see any way this can bu ruled against a shared parenting arrangement but there are some very ideological judges now so even if this gets to SCOTUS it could end up in a very bad ruling.

Considering the judge is insane, I suspect he will rule however Florida judges rule against gay couples. However, it seems to me there has to be a case in the state where two same-sex relatives shared custody of a niece or nephew that ended up in a court case. If a judge wanted to, I would think they could take that position and rule in the best interest of the child.

And while this is also not a classic egg donor situation, in the most basic application of law, when you give something away, it's gone. I don't even know if the Florida court has to consider legal contracts the couple might have made, since those contracts wouldn't be considered legal in that state.

It would sure be nice if people could just work things out without acting like nimwits.

[jaxx]

I think this is why many non-birth parent adopt the child....to give them legal parental rights should a break up occur. It's sad that some judge gets to make the call on recognizing the rights of two mothers. I'm sure the child recognizes both of them!!

[pappy]

From the Akron Beacon Journal Online

Quote:Judge: Ohio lesbian mother must share custody

<....>
Franklin County magistrate Judge Kathleen Knisely found that evidence supports the claims of Julie Rose Rowell that she and biological mother Julie Ann Smith were life partners with an agreement to raise the girl together.
<....>
Knisely found that Rowell was present for Smith’s insemination procedure and all doctor’s visits and attended the child’s birth.

Ms. Smith, the article points out, plans to appeal as far as necessary.

The only way, in my opinion, for these cases to be resolved, with minimum disruption, is through legislation (marriage equality) that makes it clear that the same rules apply to all couples regardless of the gender mix of the couple.

[jaxx]

Glad to see it was done fairly. Both should be in the child's life.