Thursday, October 25, 2012
Courts - "New Jersey Court’s Split Decision Provides Little Clarity on Surrogacy"
This story is in today's paper NY Times. The blurb reads: "A New Jersey case over whether a woman can be called the mother of the child she and her husband had through a surrogate shows the murkiness of surrogacy laws in the United States." A few quotes:
On Wednesday the New Jersey Supreme Court deadlocked over how to handle the wife’s plea to be named the mother of the child that she and her husband are raising, ending a lengthy legal battle while providing little new clarity. The state had sued, successfully, to strip the wife’s name from the birth certificate. The couple argued this was discrimination: State law automatically makes an infertile husband the father if his wife uses a sperm donor, so why should the same presumption not apply to an infertile wife? An appeals court disagreed with that distinction, siding with state officials who argued adoption was the only option for a mother with no genetic connection to a child.Recall this ILB entry from Jan. 29, 2011, headed "In the Age of Alternative Reproduction, Who Are a Child's Parents?" It discusses Indiana's Feb. 17, 2010 Court of Appeals opinion in Paternity of R.; T.G. and V.G. v. State of Indiana.
The court’s split had the effect of affirming the appellate court’s ruling and leaving the child, now 3, legally motherless. It also neatly captured the continued uncertainty across the country, 25 years after New Jersey was at the center of what remains the best-known surrogate custody dispute, over a child known as Baby M.
[More] How Appealing has just posted links to a number of articles on the New Jersey decision.