Why You Should Always Meet Your Gestational Carrier In Person

 Meeting your gestational carrier is a required component of the matching process. We are, after all, human beings with emotions and body language and senses and intuition.

It almost sounds a little silly as I type out those words, and I’m the one writing them.  What gives? Who doesn’t meet their gestational carrier, you might wonder.

Believe it or not, it happens.

In my early days of surrogacy, I belonged to several online support groups with surrogates and intended mothers from across the country.  Although the majority of the experiences the women brought to the group were positive, there were a few hair-raising ones as well.

One particularly unfortunate story involved an experienced surrogate carrying for a couple that maintained homes in the United States and Europe. They had an independent agreement (meaning they didn’t use an agency to find one another or negotiate their contract) and they used a US fertility center. They used donor eggs and the intended father’s sperm, and the surrogate was pregnant with their baby girl.

Throughout the contract agreement phase and the entire pregnancy, the surrogate spoke only with the intended father by phone. He told her that his wife spoke little English and they were overseas, so she had no contact with her intended mother.

When she delivered the baby, the intended father didn’t come to the birth. Within a day or so of giving birth, he revealed to her that his wife was never aware of the pregnancy and did not want the child, and therefore he didn’t want the baby either.

Shocking, right?!?

surrogate lawyers, surrogate lawyer, surrogate attorney, legal surrogate, surrogate legal

All’s well that ends well (in theory, at least) – the surrogate was able to get temporary guardianship of the baby and placed her with adoptive parents, who no doubt were elated.   But the guy who orchestrated the pregnancy and his unsuspecting wife? Clearly all sorts of crazy.

It turns out that the surrogate never met either of the parents (and this was long before the days of Facetime or video conference calls). She’d only spoken with the intended father on the phone, and nothing more. Granted, in no way, shape or form did she deserve this to happen to her, but I have to wonder if the situation could have been avoided had she insisted on meeting both parents prior to agreeing to carry for them.

And if you follow the news, you probably already know about an unfortunate surrogacy case currently happening in California, where a gestational carrier is pregnant with triplets for a single father. He wanted to reduce the pregnancy, which she refused to do, and now it’s in question whether he wants any of the babies  at all (though they’re all his).

a face-to-face meeting is a required component of the matching process. We are, after all, human beings with emotions and body language and senses and intuition

As it turns out, she agreed to carry for him and became pregnant with his children without ever meeting him, or ever speaking with him for that matter (he is deaf, but still, there are mechanisms for people who are hearing impaired to communicate by phone, and of course there’s email).

by Susan Fuller – March 11, 2016 Surrogacy by Design

Click here to read the entire article.

in Ethics / Recently Added / Surrogacy  by Anthony Brown 0 comments

Is a Surrogate a Mother?

A battle over triplets raises difficult questions about the ethics of the surrogacy industry and the meaning of parenthood.

Last year, a 47-year-old California woman named Melissa Cook decided to become a commercial surrogate. Cook is a mother of four, including a set of triplets, and had served as a surrogate once before, delivering a baby for a couple in 2013. According to her lawyer, Harold Cassidy, she’d found it to be a rewarding way to supplement the salary she earned at her office job. “Like other women in this situation, she was motivated by two things: One, it was a good thing to do for people, and two, she needed some money,” Cassidy says.

For her second surrogacy, Cook signed up with a broker called Surrogacy International. Robert Walmsley, a fertility attorney and part owner of the firm, says he was initially reluctant to work with her because of her age, but relented after she presented a clean bill of health from her doctor. Eventually, Surrogacy International matched her with a would-be father, known in court filings as C.M.

surrogacy ethics

According to a lawsuit filed on Cook’s behalf in United States District Court in Los Angeles earlier this month, C.M. is a 50-year-old single man, a postal worker who lives with his elderly parents in Georgia. Cook never met him in person, and because C.M. is deaf, Cassidy says the two never spoke on the phone or communicated in any way except via email. In May, Cook signed a contract promising her $33,000 to carry a pregnancy, plus a $6,000 bonus in case of multiples. In August, Jeffrey Steinberg, a high-profile fertility doctor, used in vitro fertilization to implant Cook with three male embryos that were created using C.M.’s sperm and a donor egg. (According to the lawsuit, the gender selection was done at C.M.’s request.) When an egg donor is under 35, as C.M.’s was, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine strongly recommends implanting only one embryo to avoid a multiple pregnancy, but some clinics will implant more to increase the chances that at least one will prove viable. In this case, they all survived. For the second time in her life, Cook was pregnant with triplets. And soon, the virtual relationship she had with their father would fall apart.

Cook and C.M. are still strangers to each other, but they are locked in a legal battle over both the future of the children she’s going to bear and the institution of surrogacy itself. Because she’s come under pressure to abort one of the fetuses, Cook’s case has garnered some conservative media attention. This story, however, is about much more than the abortion wars. It illustrates some of the thorniest issues plaguing the fertility industry: the creation of high-risk multiple pregnancies, the lack of screening of intended parents, the financial vulnerability of surrogates, and the almost complete lack of regulation around surrogacy in many states.

The United States is one of the few developed countries where commercial, or paid, surrogacy is allowed—it is illegal in Canada and most of Europe. In the U.S., it’s governed by a patchwork of contradictory state laws. Eight states expressly authorize it. Four states—New York, New Jersey, Washington, and Michigan—as well as the District of Columbia prohibit it. In the remaining states, there’s either no law at all on commercial surrogacy or it is allowed with restrictions.

California is considered a particularly friendly place for surrogacy arrangements. In 1993, a California Supreme Court ruling, Johnson v. Calvert, denied the attempts of a gestational surrogate named Anna Johnson to assert maternal rights. (A gestational surrogate is one like Cook who has no genetic relationship to the fetus or fetuses she caries.) What mattered in determining maternity, the court ruled, were the intentions of the various parties going into the pregnancy: “Because two women each have presented acceptable proof of maternity, we do not believe this case can be decided without enquiring into the parties’ intentions as manifested in the surrogacy agreement,” the court said. It was a victory for Walmsley, who represented the couple who’d hired Johnson as their surrogate.

Slate.com, February 15, 2016, by Michelle Goldberg

Click here to read the entire article.

in Ethics / In the News / IVF / Surrogacy  by Anthony Brown 0 comments

Are Second Parent Adoptions Necessary With a Surrogate?

Are second parent adoptions necessary when using a surrogate?

Establishing parental rights when someone has their family with the help of a surrogate (typically gay men looking to start a family or women who cannot carry for medical reasons) is a tricky area of the law and varies greatly state to state. Prior to the Supreme Court’s June decision in Obergefell vs. Hodges granting marriage equality to same-sex couples, second parent adoptions on the part of the non biological parent were almost always required once a couple started a family via surrogacy. Post-Obergefell, second parent adoptions are still the only method for securing unassailable rights between your child and the nonbiological parent. Click here for a video on the ABCs of surrogacy.surrogacy

Types of Surrogacy

There are two types of surrogacy: traditional and gestational. Traditional surrogacy is when the surrogate mother is also the egg donor and the child is biologically related to her. With a gestational surrogacy, a fertilized egg is implanted into the womb of the surrogate and she is not biologically related to the child. Most surrogates today are gestational surrogates. The establishment of parental rights may be executed, in some cases, by a pre or post birth order in the state where the surrogate lives, but more often by second or step parent adoption in the intended parents’ home state.

Second Parent Adoptions

If your partner had a child with a surrogate before you were married or in a relationship, second parent adoptions are required to obtain legal parental status of that child. If the surrogate is named on the birth certificate of the child, they may need to sign a “consent to adoption” form. If you are just beginning the surrogacy process as a couple, throughout the proceedings, the nonbiological parent may be able to obtain either a pre-birth or post-birth parentage order. Some states do not allow for parentage orders, in which case a second parent adoption would be necessary in the intended parents’ home state to legally obtain those parental rights.

Variations State to State

Keep in mind that laws surrounding surrogacy vary greatly state to state, and surrogacy is even illegal in 5 states, including New York. If you’re a New York resident with your heart set on surrogacy, you will need to find a surrogate mother in a state in which it is legal.

Canadian Surrogacy

Many couples are now looking to our neighbors to the north for surrogacy services.  The main difference in the laws regarding surrogacy in Canada is that surrogacy is NOT compensated.  Surrogates are reimbursed for their costs, which include such items as lost wages, bed rest, family care, health costs, maternity clothing and other pregnancy related costs.  All provinces except Quebec allow for enforcement of these altruistic surrogacy agreements.Canada

The critical consideration is parental establishment after the child is born.  In some provinces there is an administrative method of securing parental rights for the non-genetically related parent.  While this may be appropriate in Canada, it does not establish legally recognized rights in the U.S.  Most provinces will also offer a court declaration of parentage.  This is the very least in protection for the non-genetically related parent.

Intended parents should also consider a step or second parent adoption back in the U.S in their home state to secure parental rights for the non-genetically related parent.  Adoption orders receive full faith and credit automatically in the U.S. and around the world.  Parentage orders may or may not be recognized in countries which have not legalized surrogacy.  Also, in the States, with an adoption order, there is no questions as to the rights of a parent created through adoption.  Not all states have parental declaration orders and enforcing them may prove extremely costly.

If you and your partner are considering getting an out of state/country surrogate, it’s vital to get professional legal assistance to make sure your parental rights are recognized across all state and international borders.

Anthony M. Brown, head of Family and Estates division of Albert W. Chianese & Associations, is here to help you and your family grow and to make sure all of your parental rights are legally protected. If you have any questions pertaining to legal issues of your parentage, call 212-953-6447 or email and I will do my best to help your family!

Contact Time For Families

Contact Form
* indicates required field

in Featured Articles / Second Parent Adoption / Services / Surrogacy  by Anthony Brown 0 comments

Surrogate Legal Expansion Expected in China

Surrogate, Legal Expansion Expected in China

Surrogate businesses in China are expecting a new wave of surrogate legal expansion following the end of the country’s decades-long one-child policy and allow all couples to have a second child, the media reported on Tuesday.

The Communist Party of China’s Central Committee announced on October 29 at the end of a four-day plenary session in Beijing that the country will ease its family planning policy and allow all couples to have two children in order to help deal with the aging population.

A week after the announcement, several surrogacy agencies said there has been an increase in the number of people reaching out to them about having a second child through a surrogate mother, the Global Times reported.

Following second child policy, surrogate legal expansion in China’s surrogacy sector expected

“There are three types of customers; the first type is those who are too old to risk giving birth to a child or due to the fact that the eggs of those aged over 35 have a bigger chance of having chromosomal abnormalities. The second type is those who have problems with the womb,” said an official from a Shanghai surrogacy agency.

“The third type is those who want to decide the gender of the embryo,” Li said.

Surrogacy was officially banned in China after a ruling in 2001 that no medical organisations or personnel would be allowed to be involved in any form of surrogacy. Violators faced a fine of up to 30,000 yuan ($4,730) and had to bear criminal responsibility.

Click here to read the entire article.

 

Daijiworld.com, November 5, 2015

in In the News / International / Surrogacy  by Anthony Brown 0 comments

Surrogacy Law Plugging the Loopholes

No Surrogacy Law in Unregulated India

Surrogacy law is desperately required in a country which ranks lower than traditionally patriarchal societies like Qatar and Saudi Arabia in the United Nations Gender Inequality Index, the Government’s intent to block commercial surrogacy for foreigners in India is reason to celebrate. Despite impressive and revolutionary breakthroughs, India’s story of gender equality remains far from inspiring.

From the rural and illiterate to the urban and literate, Indian women contend with chronic gender inequities which liberating moves like education and employment opportunities have been unable to correct. Rampant instances of gender crimes and sexist biases dominate the narrative of a country, where literacy may have unfettered women, but where decadent mindsets stymie their participation in the country’s growth story. The unregulated world of commercial surrogacy contains one such saga of exploitation of the economically challenged Indian woman, across rural and urban divides.

The Health Ministry’s affidavit to the Supreme Court this Wednesday makes the Government’s stand on the matter abundantly clear and is indeed a significant step in insuring the rights of a surrogate mother and her child. It states that, “The Government of India does not support commercial surrogacy”, and that surrogacy should be available to “Indian married infertile couples only and not to foreigners”. Arguably, the altruistic intent of surrogacy — to address the parental needs of a childless couple — cannot be contested. Celebrities, from Hollywood to Bollywood, have, in fact, rendered the idea of surrogacy eminently fetching. Be it Hollywood’s Nicole Kidman and Sarah Jessica Parker or even Elton John with a same-sex partner, to Indian celebrities like Shah Rukh Khan and Aamir Khan, couples, heterosexual and homosexual, have successfully reinforced the idea of altruistic surrogacy.

Commercial Surrogacy Needs Surrogacy Law to Prevent Explotation

However, there is reason to believe that the Rs900 crore worth surrogacy trade in India, far from being an altruistic enterprise, is predominantly an appalling tale of female exploitation, a surrogate mother in India available at less than one-third the cost of a similar volunteer in more developed pockets of the world. Declared a criminal offense by civilised countries the world over (from Australia, Japan, Canada, France, and the United Kingdom to some states in the United States), commercial surrogacy in India has had sinister manifestations, ethical and legal.

Today India is a favored destination for surrogacy tourism owing to the high-end medical science and technologies its medical fraternity has access to. This, alongside the criminally low financial costs and lack of Government regulation, has predictably led the practice into ethical and legal abuse, earning India the avoidable distinction of being an international hub of surrogacy services.

As per existing Indian laws, same sex couples with foreign nationality or single foreigners cannot commission surrogacy here even as single Indians can. Also, foreigners seeking surrogacy here must be a man and woman “duly married” and the marriage should have sustained for at least two years. Lest this descend into a regressive debate on Indian lawmakers’ apathy to homosexuality, or even their xenophobia, there is need to understand the rationale behind such a provision. Innumerable instances have been reported where a child from a surrogate Indian mother has been abandoned by its intended foreign parents without a thought to the fate of the mother or the child’s imperiled future.

Legal since 2002, commercial surrogacy in India has been open to grave misuse. The shocking case of an Australian couple forsaking one of the twin babies born to an Indian surrogate only because the two already had a child of the same sex, highlighted the need to urgently streamline this unregulated sector. In 2008, the Supreme Court had to intervene in a case where the commissioning parents were divorced during the pregnancy and the intended mother refused to accept the child. As per current Indian laws, foreign couples seeking surrogacy have to provide a written undertaking from the country of their origin that a child born through surrogacy would be taken to their country. However, this provision alone has not been able to prevent misuse.

A more comprehensive answer is available in the 2010 draft, Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Bill pending in Parliament. Admittedly, surrogacy forms only a part of the proposed Bill which intends to be a legal umbrella providing respite to childless couples while protecting surrogate mothers. Surrogacy, however, has been specifically vulnerable to abuse, claiming hundreds of economically disadvantaged women as its unsuspecting victims.

Therefore, there is urgent need for a fail-safe surrogacy law that guards the interests of the intended parents and the surrogate mother and child through a monitoring system rigorously implemented. Israel has led in this matter, becoming the first country in the world to approve of a state-ordered surrogacy policy wherein every case is scrutinized and sanctioned by the Government. Even Russia, where commercial surrogacy is legal, the industry is subject to rigid scrutiny by Governmental agencies.

Click here to read the entire article.

 

DailyPioneer.com, October 30. 2015 by Shobori Ganguli
in Ethics / International / Surrogacy  by Anthony Brown 1 comments

International Surrogacy Cases; Foreigners Banned

India Surrogacy Cases: Ban booming surrogacy service to foreigners

In International Surrogacy Cases News; India’s government said Wednesday it would ban foreigners from using surrogate mothers in the country, a move likely to hit the booming commercial surrogacy industry. Ranks of childless foreign couples have flocked to the country in recent years looking for a cheap, legal and simple route to parenthood.

Health industry estimates put the size of India’s surrogacy business at nine billion rupees ($138 million) and growing at 20 percent a year. But critics have said a lack of legislation encourages “rent-a-womb” exploitation of young, poor Indian women.

In an affidavit to the Supreme Court on Wednesday the government said it “does not support commercial surrogacy”. “No foreigners can avail surrogacy services in India,” it told the court, which is hearing a petition regarding the industry, adding that surrogacy would be available “only for Indian couples”.

Thousands of infertile couples, many from overseas, hire the wombs of Indian women to carry their embryos through to birth. India, with cheap technology, skilled doctors and a steady supply of local surrogates, is one of relatively few countries where women can be paid to carry another’s child. Surrogacy for profit is illegal in many other countries.

The process usually involves in-vitro fertilization and embryo transfer, leading to a rise in fertility centers offering such services.

A top fertility expert branded the government’s move discriminatory, while a leading women’s activist warned it could push the industry underground and out of reach of regulators. “Banning commercial surrogacy will send some couples onto the black market and deprive other couples of the chance of children,” Ranjana Kumari, director of the Centre for Social Research, told AFP.

“Our research shows many surrogates do not have health insurance and are paid poorly, among other issues,” she said, adding that stronger regulation rather than an outright ban was needed. The private petition to the top court seeks a halt to the importation of human embryos for commercial purposes.

Earlier this month the court in Delhi expressed its concern and ordered the government to spell out measures for regulating the industry. The government’s affidavit, presented to the court by Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar, said it would “require some time to bring the law in place”.

surrogacy cases

India decided surrogacy cases: banning foreigners from surrogate mothers,similar decisions expected internationally by booming commercial surrogacy industry

The surrogacy process usually involves in-vitro fertilisation and embryo “The government will prohibit and penalise commercial surrogacy services,” it said.

The government has been consulting women’s groups and the health industry on a draft bill, the Assisted Reproductive Technology, that seeks to regulate the industry.

– ‘No exploitation’ –

Click here to read the entire article.

 

Yahoonews.com, by Trudy Harris, October 27, 2015
in Ethics / In the News / International / Surrogacy  by Anthony Brown 0 comments

Step Parent Adoption; Married still need one?

Step Parent Adoption; Marriage means I don’t need one?

Step Parent adoption is still a must to secure your family, even after marriage equality.  Marriage equality was a long fought battle and a much celebrated victory for gay and lesbian couples across the country. Now that it is the law of the land, many people mistakenly believe that their marriage alone will secure their family. Unfortunately family law has not caught up to the realities of how we create our modern families.

For both gay and lesbian couples, securing the legal rights of a non-biological parent is crucial to create the kind of emotional, and legal, security that most other families take for granted. The legality of both parents relationship to their child is often assumed. Parents are parents, regardless of the biological connection to your child. In New York State, the law doesn’t agree.

Married lesbian couples in many states, New York included, can list a non-biological mother name as a parent on a child’s birth certificate if they are married at the time of the birth of the child and they use an anonymous sperm donor. While a name on a birth certificate is an important goal, it in itself does not create a legal relationship, only through step parent adoption can they be acheived.

Step Parent adoption is still a must to secure your family, even after marriage equality.

In New York County, Surrogate Judge Kristin Booth Glen, in a case entitled In the Matter of Sebastian, discusses the issue of establishing parental rights for a non-biological parent specifically.  The case involves married lesbian couple who used an anonymous sperm donor to have a child. Glen concludes, when discussing the non-biological mother’s relationship with the child that, “the only remedy available here that would accord the parties full and unassailable protection is a second-parent adoption pursuant to New York Domestic Relations Law (“DRL”) § 111 et seq.”  Glen further states, “that a judicial order of adoption in one state must be afforded full faith and credit in every state, and that there can be no “public Policy” exception to that mandatory recognition…”.

While it is true that many states have what is called a “martial presumption of parentage,” the truth about this is that it is applied differently in different states.  For instance, in New York State, where I practice, there is specific case law that holds that the marital presumption of parentage does not apply to same-sex couples.  That case is called “Matter of Paczkowski v. Paczkowski.”  In that case, the appellate division of the Second Department of New York, the state’s intermediate appellate court, held that the “presumption of legitimacy… is one of a biological relationship, not a legal status.”

In essence, the court says that a marriage does not create a legal right between a non-biological parent and a child.  While it may be an indication of intent to be a parent, as would a non-biological parent’s name on a birth certificate, the only way to actually create the legal relationship that guarantees the security that all same-sex families need, is through an adoption order, and in some states, a parentage order.  Unfortunately, New York currently does not have the capacity to issue a parentage order but there is legislation in committee in Albany that may change that. 

Surrogate Options & Known Donors Complicate the Legalities of Chosen Families

One further compounding variable is that many lesbian couples are now choosing known sperm donors. While the desire for a child to know their biological heritage and have a father figure makes sense to many couples, adding another potential parent into the mix can create problems if an adoption does not take place to terminate the donor’s rights to the child and create the intended, non-biological parent’s rights to their child.

For male couples who want to have biologically related children, surrogacy is the only real option. Surrogacy is an emotionally, and financially, exhausting process.  It is a true leap of faith.  Couples considering surrogacy must juggle a myriad of concerns, the least of which being the cost.  With gestational surrogacy tabs running as high as $180,000.00, budgeting is a must.  Lawyer’s fees are often lumped together in surrogacy accounting statements, and some agencies do not include the cost of a second or step parent adoption in order to keep the numbers low.  Often, the cost of a pre-birth order is less than a second parent adoption.

step parents adoption, step parent adoption, adoption step parent, adoption for step parents

In some cases, depending on where your surrogate mother gives birth, her name may be removed from the child’s original birth certificate by a proceeding called a pre-birth order.  Some states do not provide for pre-birth orders.  Those that do may or may not replace the surrogate’s name with that of the non-biological intended parent.  California, for instance, does offer the ability to include the non-biological parent’s name on the child’s original birth certificate, and that very significant step is often mistakenly viewed as a replacement for a second parent adoption, which is the only definitive way to establish parental rights between a non-biological parent and a child born through surrogacy.

In order to understand why a second parent adoption is vital if you have a pre or post-birth (or parentage) order, you must understand what that order is, and what protections it provides.  Pre and post-birth orders are court orders that are obtained by filing a petition in the appropriate court in the state in which the child will be born.  Often, these petitions are not filed in the county where the carrier lives, but in a county which has a judge who understands the importance of these orders and grants them upon the motion of an attorney representing the intended parents.  This in itself may create a problem.

Some states may not recognize the relationship created by the pre-birth order because of the lack of a full judicial process attendant to a parentage order.  For an issue to be precluded from challenge, for instance the issue of a non-biological parent’s relationship to a child born through surrogacy, the court looks at the process by which that issue has been established.  The reason why adoption orders from one state are valid in every state, regardless of the gender of the parents, is because the judicial process of the adoption.  The state, for all intents and purposes, becomes and “adversary” to the adoptive parents in the adoption process.  The state performs background checks, it orders that fingerprints be taken, mandates that a home study is performed by a licensed social worker to ensure that the child’s prospective residence is safe and clean and essentially verifies all adoption requirements submitted by the petitioning parent, or parents.  The adoption order is the product of a fully litigated judicial process.  Because this rigorous process is not part of a parentage order proceeding, states which do not offer such orders may not recognize a relationship created in one.

Furthermore, some courts, through a parentage order, will add the name of the non-biological parent to the original birth certificate if that person is married to the biological parent.  For same-sex couples, this can present an issue, particularly if the non-biological parent’s relationship to the child is being challenged in a state that resists same-sex marriage.  These situations usually arise upon the dissolution of a relationship and during the custody/visitation/support aspect of that process.

Protecting our families may seem like navigating a ship through a sea of legal, financial and emotional waters.  But what is more important than the security of knowing that every child has a legal relationship with their parents that cannot be challenged for whatever reason. Every parent deserves that security as well.

by Anthony M. Brown – September 16, 2015

Anthony M. Brown, Esq. currently is an associate with the law firm of Albert W. Chianese & Associates heading their Nontraditional Family and Estates Law division serving unmarried individuals, couples and families in Manhattan and on Long Island.  Anthony is the Executive Director of The Wedding Party and has been a Board member since its inception in 1999.   The Wedding Party is a non-profit educational organization that educates the public about marriage and its importance to all citizens through outreach programs and strategic media placement. Anthony is the founder of TimeForFamilies.com, a web environment dedicated to assisting gay and lesbian couples create their own families. Anthony is the Board Chairman of Men Having Babies, a non-profit organization created to assist gay men looking create families through surrogate options and is a legal consultant for Family By Design, a co-parenting information and matching website.

 

 

in Adoption / Anonymous/Known Donation / Featured Articles / Known Donor / Legal / Parenting / Second Parent Adoption / Surrogacy  by Anthony Brown 0 comments

To adopt, or not to adopt… Really?

March 20, 2012 (See 2015 addendum @ the bottom of the article.)

Legal Surrogacy – To adopt, or not to adopt…???

adoptSurprisingly, that has been one of the most asked questions by parents of children born with the assistance of a surrogate mother.  In many cases, the carrier’s name may be removed from the child’s original birth certificate by a proceeding called a pre-birth order.  Some states do not provide for pre-birth orders.  Those that do, may or may not replace the carrier’s name with that of the non-biological intended parent.  California, for instance, does offer the ability to include the non-biological parent’s name on the child’s original birth certificate, and that very significant step is often mistakenly viewed as a replacement for a second parent adoption, which is the only definitive way to establish parental rights between a non-biological parent and a child born through legal surrogacy.

Legal Surrogacy is an emotionally, and financially, exhausting process.  It is a true leap of faith.  Couples considering surrogacy must juggle a myriad of concerns, the least of which being the cost.  With gestational surrogacy tabs running as high as $150,000.00, budgeting is a must.  Lawyer’s fees are often lumped together in surrogacy accounting statements, and some agencies do not include the cost of a second parent adoption in order to keep the numbers low.  Often, the cost of a pre-birth order is less than a second parent adoption.

In order to understand why a second parent adoption is vital, you must understand what a pre-birth order is, and what protections it provides.  Pre-birth orders are court orders that are obtained by filing a petition in the appropriate court in the state in which the child will be born.  Often, these petitions are not filed in the county where the carrier lives, but in a county which has a judge who understands the importance of pre-birth orders and grants them upon the motion of an attorney representing the intended parents.  This in itself may create a problem.

Some states may not recognize the relationship created by the pre-birth order because of the lack of a full judicial process attendant to a pre-birth order.  For an issue to be precluded from challenge, for instance the issue of a non-biological parent’s relationship to a child born through surrogacy, the court looks at the process by which that issue has been established.  The reason why adoption orders from one state are valid in every state, regardless of the gender of the parents, is because the judicial process of the adoption.  The state, for all intents and purposes, becomes and “adversary” to the adoptive parents in the adoption process.  The state performs background checks, it orders that fingerprints be taken, mandates that a homestudy is performed by a licensed social worker to ensure that the child’s prospective residence is safe and clean and essentially verifies that all adoption requirements by the petitioning parent, or parents.  The adoption order is the product of a fully litigated judicial process.  Because this rigorous process is not part of a pre-birth order proceeding, states which do not offer pre-birth orders may not recognize a relationship created in such an order.

Furthermore, some courts, through a pre-birth order, will add the name of the non-biological parent to the original birth certificate if that person is married to the biological parent.  For same-sex couples, this can present a fatal issue, particularly if the non-biological parent’s relationship to the child is being challenged in a state that does not recognize same-sex marriage.  These situations usually arise upon the dissolution of a relationship and during the custody/visitation/support aspect of that process.

In New York County, Legal Surrogacy Judge Kristin Booth Glen, in a case entitled In the Matter of Sebastian[i] discusses the issue of establishing parental rights for a non-biological parent specifically.  The case involves married lesbian couple who used an anonymous sperm donor to have a child. Glen concludes, “that although [the] petitioner [non-biological parent] already has a legally protected parental relationship with Sebastian [through a marriage recognized in New York] and, even in the absence of that legal relationship, could utilize several less intrusive, expensive and time consuming methods of establishing one, the only remedy available here that would accord the parties full and unassailable protection is a second-parent adoption pursuant to New York Domestic Relations Law (“DRL”) § 111 et seq.”  Glen further states, “that a judicial order of adoption in one state must be afforded full faith and credit in every state, and that there can be no “public Policy” exception to that mandatory recognition…”.

The Matter of Sebastian case is an amazing confluence of family law, Constitutional law and reproductive law, with the ultimate conclusion that same-sex parents need to adopt to secure the non-biological parent’s rights to their children.  It is a broad and definitive statement that applies to all same-sex families, regardless of how their children were conceived.

While parents going through legal surrogacy must navigate financial and emotional waters, as well as an unsure legal landscape, the last step in the process, the second parent adoption, may seem like an afterthought.  It is, however, the only way to complete the process and ensure that each parent has a permanent and portable legal relationship with the child.

 

 

ADDENDUM (July 17, 2015) – It seems like ages ago when I wrote this piece, and the gay rights movement has literally transformed the world in those short 3 years.  While marriage equality is the law of the land in the United States, many people misinterpret this truly revolutionary civil rights gain as having the same transformative and direct effect on family law, specifically as it applies to the rights of a non-biological child to their bio parent’s spouse, even if achieved through legal surrogacy. 

While it is true that many states have what is called a “martial presumption of parentage,” the truth about this is that it is applied differently in different states.  For instance, in New York state, where I practice, there is specific case law that holds that the marital presumption of parentage does not apply to same-sex couples.  That case is called “Matter of Paczkowski v. Paczkowski.”  In that case, the appellate division of the Second Department of New York, the state’s intermediate appellate court, held that the “presumption of legitimacy… is one of a biological relationship, not a legal status.”

In essence, the court says that a marriage does not create a legal right between a non-biological parent and a child.  While it may be an indication of intent to be a parent, as would a non-biological parent’s name on a birth certificate (as echoed in “Matter of Sebastian” as mention in the body of this article) the only way to actually create the legal relationship that guarantees the security that all same-sex families need, is through an adoption order, and in some states, a parentage order.  Unfortunately, New York currently does not have the capacity to issue a parentage order but there is legislation in committee in Albany that may change that. 

In our ever evolving world where gay couples and, more particularly, gay families are becoming more common place and understood, there are still areas of the law that directly affect our lives that continue to fall short of protecting our families in the ways that they must be protected.  Creating family security is of the utmost importance and it is the responsibility of every gay parent to make sure that happens.

 

 

 

 

[i]  http://www.nylj.com/nylawyer/adgifs/decisions/041009glen.pdf 25 Misc.3d 567, 879 N.Y.S.2d 677 (N.Y. Co. Sur. Ct. 2009)

in Adoption / Featured Articles / Surrogacy  by Anthony Brown 0 comments