Skip to comments.Lesbian to Seek Parental Rights in Washington
Posted on 11/03/2005 11:27:05 AM PST by kemathen7
OLYMPIA, Wash. The Washington state Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that a woman who raised a child from birth to age 6 while in a relationship with the girl's biological mother can seek parental rights as a "de facto parent (search)," essentially creating a new class of parent in the state.
"Today we hold that our common law recognizes the status of de facto parents and places them in parity with biological and adoptive parents in our state," the court, led by Justice Bobbe J. Bridge, wrote in the 7-2 decision. "Neither the United States Supreme Court nor this court has ever held that 'family' or 'parents' are terms limited in their definition by a strict biological prerequisite."
Sue Ellen Carvin (search), who goes by "Mian," sued her former partner, Page Britain (search), in King County Superior Court in November 2002, alleging that Britain had unfairly cut off access to Britain's biological daughter, identified in court papers as L.B.
The two had been together for about six years when they decided to raise a child together. Britain was artificially inseminated and gave birth in 1995. For the next several years, Carvin stayed home to raise the girl, who called her "Mama" and Britain "Mommy."
But a year and a half ago, Britain and Carvin split. Britain married the sperm donor and subsequently barred Carvin from seeing L.B.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
britain married the sperm donor LOL. That is so funny. Must really gall the girlfriend.
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We're Know We're Dead Wrong.")
How tragic. They whole thing is so sad for that child.
The "birth" mother is being a hypocritical bitch.
If the Judge rules for the thrown out lesbo will the girl then have 2 mommies or 2 daddies?
WTF? Your for the collapse of family values? And you post on the board because?
Seems to me that biological parents ought to have pretty much absolute control over who their child is permitted to associate with, without having others impose their will on them.
Even if it is unfair.
Thanks - will ping the list a little later...gotta run.
And you are totally whacked.
I'm guessing from your handle that you live in San Fagisco? Totally apt.
All that I can say is that it is insane. What is this judge thinking? What is this woman Carvin thinking? Pray for the daughter, because she's gonna need it.
So...she was "born" that way...so much that she married the FATHER of the baby.
Don't jump to conclusions w/o facts.
1) I am opposed to people having these kinds of births. Lesbians and Gays via sperm donors. But that battle was already lost as pertains to this child. Correct?
2) The two women entered into an agreement. One was to have the child, one was to raise the child, as the stay at home 'mom'.
3) The birth mother now wants to dissolve the agreement against the wishes of her ex partner. Has she suddenly found family values? I doubt it.
Regardless of if we like their lifestyle or feel that the agreement to raise the child in a Lesbian household, is right or wrong, we have a situation where one partner is being denied the child she raised for several years.
That is also not right.
and save your insults.
see my post # 15.
I'm torn on this. I hate the idea of 'homosexual partner' parental rights. On the other hand, this poor child has a close relationship with the woman. Such a sudden, forced separation has to be causing the child a lot of pain.
Would you feel the same if the partner was a male who had raised this little girl for 6 years, then was denied a relationship with her because mom went out and married the turkey baster? Just curious if it is about homosexuality, or if it's something else.
I forget the case name, but not too long ago the SCOTUS
shot down Washingtons `grandparents visitation' statute,
so an appeal here is a certainty I'd think.
Yours is a valid argument in favor of denying custody to the one partner. But, these lesbos who do this want it both ways. specifically:
A case in Sweden where they sued the sperm donor for child support. He lost.
Now this one. Sorry these people want to live their "lifestyle" without the responsibilities, then they hide behind or run to the courts when they change their minds. No. They made a decision, they should have to abide by the decision and not deny the woman who raised the child visitation.
I doubt the little girl would be 'forced' to have a relationship with her. If the woman was good to her and treated her with love, the little girl probably loves her. If she grows to 'hate' the lesbian, it would be because of the attitude of the 'biological parents.' (Same dynamics as when hetero couples split and mom talks bad about the guy the kid thought of as dad all along.)
OK... I see your point.
if you have a serious question I will be glad to address it.
If gays want the same "rights", they should suffer the same legal consequences. Wanna get married? Then file taxes jointly (can anyone say marriage penalty?). Wanna split up? Then get a legal divorce, risk getting charged with bigamy, pay child support, split community property assets, be co-responsible for the other partner's debts, etc. etc. (No, I'm not advocating gay marriage.)
Until now, you were right. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Just auess, but I wonder if mommy was having an affair with the "sperm donor". It doesn't say anything about artificial insemination in here.
I'm with you. They can't have it both ways. You wanna play the pipe, you have to pay the piper.
A drama very much like this unfolded at my work earlier this year. Lesbian "family" with the biological mother and her partner each being "mommy" and then they split (the pretend mommy works here). Talk about a soap opera.
The point you are leaving out is that the one 'partner' has no relationship whatsoever to the child. She is now, and always has been, no more than a long term baby sitter.
Should nannies have rights to the children they supervise? I think not.
Secondly, the 'partner' practices a lifestyle that has been shown to be detrimental to children. Homosexuals have a higher incidence of also being child molesters and because of this, for the sake of our children, every homosexual must be considered a child molester. It would be evil to put this child in a sitiation where she will certainly be molested. If not by the 'partner' then by one or more of the 'partners' friends.
They should just do as a friend of mine did. She got 2 dogs, they call them "the boys". Much easier, plus it fulfills thier need to be powerful over something.
Bobbe Bridge is a well known activist judge and irresponsible alcoholic.
Its absolutely about homosexuality. Homosexuals are perverts and I am not afraid to say it. Are you aware of any lesbians in the animal kingdom?
The child deserves and intact and normal family with a father and mother. Homosexuals should not be raising children or perhaps its ok with you that children be raised by satanists or drug addicts.
Your not aware of circumstantial evidence and neither am I. How do you know that the birth father was not involved the whole time? Perhaps she is very close to him. Perhaps the birth mother is aware of certain things that make her suspicious of this lesbian women. We dont know and for the sake of the child she should be provided the opportunity for intact normal (yes that means one man and one women) family.
Homos (not used derogatory, just short hand for homosexual) should not be given the opportunity to harm these children. Study after study indicates that homo behavoir begins after molestation or same parent neglect; all of the priests were not just pedophiles but mostly homo pedaphiles.
It is definitely "right"
The lesbo has no more "right" to this child than if she were the mom's sister or mother.
The fact that she was in the child's life is insufficient.
[Look at how many fathers are denied visitation and they were truly involved.]
Personally, I think the use of artificial insemination, sperm donation and turkey baster babies should all be illegal. That would hold true for both Gays and Heterosexuals.
If you cannot have a baby, adopt.
No, but I don't use the behavior of animals as a gage for how humans should act. Interesting that homosexuals claim that homosexuality occurs in animals, so that makes it okay. I always say to them that animals lick their behinds, throw feces and eat their own vomit, so I don't use them as a model of behavior.
The child deserves and intact and normal family with a father and mother.
Children do best with an intact family with a mom and dad. However, this child did not have that for 6 years. It is unfair to the child to suddenly eliminate the person who raised her for 6 years from her life.
By the way, do you have some information to show that both mom and dad have suddenly found Jesus or something? Because I doubt the family the girl is in right now is all that stable considering the history of mom and dad.
Homosexuals should not be raising children or perhaps its ok with you that children be raised by satanists or drug addicts.
Nothing like a little hysteria to show us all that you can't deal with the topic in an adult manner.
As I have already stated, a stable home with mom and dad is best for a child. It's is also best for a child not to suddenly eliminate from her life a person who has raised her and loved her for 6 years. The only reason that should be done is if the child is in imminent danger. Can you show that to be the case here?
Yes, that was my point in a previous post. "Ex" spouses or partners, no matter the gender of each party, can poison the mind of a child against that person they used to love and who used to (and still) loves the child.
My question wasn't to you, so what was the point of your post to me? Is that a serious enough question for you?
I was responding to your post #20, in which you quote a question which was directed at me previously.