Judge: Lesbian couple can both be listed on birth certificate

Associated Press ... breaking on direct feed | March 12, 2003

[NYer]

TRENTON, N.J. (AP) _ A lesbian couple can both be listed as parents on the birth certificate of the baby they're expecting in May, a judge has ruled.

State officials said it was the first time that two women who were both physically tied to an unborn child had tried to make sure they were both listed on the birth certificate. One woman is carrying the child and her partner provided the egg, and they plan to raise the child together.

The ruling issued Tuesday by Sussex County Family Court Judge James A. Farber means the unidentified women will share a financial obligation to the child as soon as it is born, and if one parent dies, the other will immediately have custody. Analysts said the case is unusual because when lesbian couples have a child together, the woman who delivers the baby is usually named as the mother on the birth certificate. Her partner must then adopt the child because she is not genetically related, and the court process can take six months or longer.

The woman providing the egg told The Record of Bergen County that she hoped the ruling would help other couples. The two live in northern New Jersey and have been together for seven years, and the woman said they pursued in vitro fertilization after her partner tried unsuccessfully to conceive with her own eggs and artificial insemination.

Gay rights supporters welcomed the decision, saying it recognized the expanding definition of the family, but critics said the ruling was another case of improper judicial activism. Melissa Brisman, the couple's lawyers, said the ruling was a ``victory for reproductive rights,'' but she doubted it would have a major legal impact. Brisman said few lesbian couples opt to conceive the way her clients did, and noted that other judges are not required to follow Farber's decision.

AP-ES-03-12-03 0746EST

[NYer]

Wonder how the birth certificate will read ... Mother / Mother??

And, what about the rights of the sperm donor? It's not unusual now, for children who were the product of donor insemination, to go searching for their "fathers". How will the moms handle that?

[sheik yerbouty]

Badly.

[RISU]

THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF AN "OFFICIAL LIE"

WE ALL KNOW IT TAKE A MAN AND A WOMAN TOGETHER TO HAVE A CHILD.

WHEN THE GOVERNMENT STARTS TO LIE ON PAPER, IT IS A SIGN OF ABSOLUTE GORRUPTION.

SUCH A GOVERNMENT NEED NOT BE "SUPPORTED", AND WILL FALL OF ITS OWN WEIGHT IF THE PEOPLE WILL TURN THEIR BACK ON IT.

[TheDon]

Poor child.

[xzins]

1. It's important they had to find a sperm someplace. That fact alone discredits their entire endeavor and highlights that it is an unnatural relationship.

2. Judges can be sinful humans just like the rest of us. If a sinner perverts reason, who should really be surprised?

[goodnesswins]

YES, Poor Child.....and pitiful parent. My husband's niece is a "sperm donor baby" for a mother who just wanted another baby after she got divorced. We are waiting for the S*it to hit the fan as she grows up without ANY father, and her mother keeps her from her Uncle (my husband) too......it's sick and SELFISH.

[RAT Patrol]

Lies, damn lies. The poor kid will be lied to with this judge's blessing.

[chiefqc]

Should say "It and It"

[onedoug]

Civilizational degeneration.

[ohioman]

All people behind this perversion are sick freaks! There is a large segment of America who will NEVER accept this.

[Cagey]

Poor child.

Those two words say it all.

[templar]

I'd like to read this case and the ruling. My guess is that the Lesbians filed suit against the State to have both names listed on the certificate and the State either didn't oppose it or opposed it so poorly (meaning that the State was really in favor of the couples positon) that the judge really didn't have much choice but to rule in favor of the plaintiff. This is a case that needs to be vigorously appealed through the entire N.J. apellate process. If the State (whom I'm presuming to be the defendant) doesn't do this I would assume that the States attorneys are just allowing this case to make case law that they, in fact, favor. Bad law results from bad rulings which often result from bad legal representation before the court.

Note: I'm using the word State to denote any governmental agency that the suit may have been brought against. I'm also only speculating on the reason for the ruling; I may be out in left field here.

Does anyone have access to the actual legal filings and actions involved? As a (presumably) trial court decision they are highly unlikely to be a published opinion.

[Master of Orion]

This sure throws a monkeywrench in the field of Genealogy, doesn't it?

[Salvation]

Sickening.

[HumanaeVitae]

Homosexuals should not be allowed to raise children. No matter how they are conceived.

[MEGoody]

I didn't see where it said the name of the father would be listed on the birth certificate. This could be a problem down the road due to medical issues.

[NYer]

Homosexuals should not be allowed to raise children.

How do you handle a situation where a mother or father suddenly "outs" after the kids are born?

This story underscores the level of degradation in our society today. Last year's big event was the birth of quintuplets to a surrogate mother who handed them over to their "biological" dad and his gay lover. Now that is truly sickening. And, oh yes, they are raising the kids catholic.

[jimt]

......it's sick and SELFISH.

Dittoes.