October 27, 2007 • 10:26 pm
The Kansas City Star reported yesterday that the Kansas Supreme Court has ruled against a sperm donor who had challenged that state’s law prohibiting sperm donors from exercising parental rights in the absence of a written agreement between the donor and the birth mother. This case, about which I have posted previously, has been widely watched by scholars and family law practitioners across the country, and is likely to find application beyond Kansas. It is not clear, however, whether the case is likely to have even persuasive value here in Pennsylvania. As I reported previously, the Pennsylvania Superior Court has held that a sperm donor who holds himself out as a parent of the child by, for example, being present at the child’s birth and taking an active role in the child’s life, is responsible for child support. It is not too far fetched to imagine that, on this basis, a Pennsylvania court might find that such a donor had legally cognizable parental rights. would it be much of a stretch to conclude that a donor who was willing to go to court to seek parental rights was in fact holding himself out as a parent? Needless to say, this case answers some questions, and raises many others. Once I am able to obtain a copy of the Kansas Supreme Court’s opinion I will post it here.
Filed under: Father's rights, Reproductive Technology, Visitation, custody
Most commentators have been very harshly critical of actor Alec Baldwin’s behavior in his recent dustup with his ex-wife and daughter over an angry voicemail that Baldwin left for the daughter (see my earlier post on this here and here). I am not a fan of Baldwin (although I have enjoyed some of his films). I do not like his politics or his public persona, and was, like most, appalled by his outburst at his daughter. That said – there are always many sides to the story. Stephen Baskerville provides some interesting commentary on what likely led to Baldin’s outburst, reasoning that the callous treatment that most father’s receive at the hands of the “family law” system was likely a contributing factor to Baldin’s feeling that he had been alienated from his daughter, and fueling his outburst. I, for one, find Baskerville’s analysis more than plausible, and I look forward to reading Mr. Baskerville’s book on the ongoing assault on fatherhood and marriage.
Filed under: Divorce, Father's rights, custody, parenting
Many thanks to Dustin Jones for the following post on his blog, All Things Pennsylvania Family Law, concerning what would appear to be a very, very significant ruling from the Pennsylvania Superior Court, our state’s intermediate appellate court. As soon as I can obatain a copy of the court’s opinion, I will post it here. From Dustin Jones:
Are you kidding me?
Posted on Pennlive.com:
In what legal experts are calling a precedent, a three-judge panel of the state Superior Court has ruled that a York County man must pay child support for two children of a lesbian couple for whom he acted as a sperm donor.
Quoting an earlier court decision, Senior Judge John T.K. Kelly wrote that “stepparents who have held a child out as their own are liable for support; biological parents who have exercised the rights appurtenant to that status can be no less bound.”
Overturning a Dauphin Common Pleas judge’s ruling in the case, Senior Judge John T.K. Kelly Jr. cited a 2004 ruling by Dauphin Common Pleas Judge Scott A. Evans
Jodilynn Jacob and Jennifer L. Shultz-Jacob were a couple who lived in York County and who had undergone a commitment ceremony in Pittsburgh and a civil union in Vermont.
The couple cared for four children, two of whom were adopted nephews of Jacob’s and the other two who she had with Carl Frampton, a longtime friend of Shultz-Jacob’s who had agreed to act as a sperm donor. Frampton is also named as an appellant in the case.
In February 2006 Jacob and Shultz-Jacob separated, with Jacob moving from York County to Dauphin County. The separation was followed by Shultz-Jacob asking a York County judge for full legal and physical custody of all four children.
Later, Jacob asked a Dauphin County judge for child support for two of the children from Shultz-Jacob, arguing that Frampton was “essentially a third parent” to two of the children. Frampton died from a stroke earlier this year.
Kelly noted in his opinion that Frampton had held himself out as a stepparent to the children by being present at the birth of one of the children, contributing “in excess of $13,000″ over the last four years, buying them toys and having borrowed money to obtain a vehicle in which to transport the children.
“While these contributions have been voluntary, they evidence a settled intention to demonstrate parental involvement far beyond merely biological,” wrote the judge.
For more on this story, see tomorrow’s editions of The Patriot-News.
UPDATE (5/9/07 at 6:33 P.M.): You can access the Superior Court’s opinion in the case here.
Filed under: Child Support, Father's rights, Reproductive Technology, same sex issues
April 28, 2007 • 10:30 pm
The New York Times today more or less panned Alec Baldwin’s appearance on the soon to be Rosie-less “The View,” during which he offered a fairly self serving explanation for his outburst against his daughter, and attacked the family law system. I am inclined to agree that Baldwin did not do himself any favors with his appearance. But on one point I will agree with him – that is that fathers are, on the average, not treated very well in the family law system. Fact is, no one really is. But I think that Baldwin is more right than not that fathers generally are treated poorly. If only they had a better spokesman than Alec.
Filed under: Children, Father's rights, General Family Law, TV and Movies
December 14, 2006 • 3:01 pm
Via Grant Griffiths Kansas Family and Divorce Lawyer Blog, news comes of a potentially landmark case that was heard recently by the Kansas Supreme Court in which a sprem donor is challenging a provision of Kansas law that provides that donors do not have parentla rights unless that understanding has been reduced to writing. This is a development that all practitioners should watch with interest. With Grant’s blessing, I have reduced his post on this topic in its entirety below the fold. Read the rest of this entry »
Filed under: Father's rights, Visitation, custody
