The case, which is to
be appealed to the California Supreme Court, adds
another legal twist to parental custody disputes, which
are routinely between a man and woman. The case
underscores that laws dealing with parental rights for
gay or lesbian couples is in unmapped territory.
The decision, based on
a dispute between two California lesbians who both
reared twins after one woman gave birth using the
other's eggs, is based squarely on a 1993 California
Supreme Court parental rights precedent. But a lesbian
rights group and the attorney for the losing woman who
sought parental rights after the two split up say
Tuesday's opinion is outdated, and the court discounted
evidence that the couple intended to rear the children
as joint parents.
The appeals court,
however, ruled that the birth mother, who was
artificially inseminated at a San Francisco hospital,
has full parental rights despite her lover being the
genetic mother of the children.
"An adoption decree
would provide objective, formalized proof of the
parties' parentage intentions," the 1st District Court
of Appeal ruled.
But the losing mother's
attorney, Jill Hersh, said her client "didn't adopt
because she was the biological mother. She didn't think
she had to. The legal system hasn't caught up with the
modern-day facts of this case."
Hersh and the National
Center for Lesbian Rights said the ruling was a blow to
gays and lesbians.
But the winning woman's
attorney, Diana Richmond, said the decision "beautifully
upholds the freedom of choice of same-sex partners on
whether both partners will or will not be the parents."
She said the women in
this case, whose identities the court did not disclose
to protect the privacy of the 8-year-old twins, "had
agreed that only one of them will be the parent."
"She would have to
adopt. They never agreed to an adoption and no adoption
proceedings were initiated," Richmond said.
The court ruled that,
although the losing mother who donated her eggs was a
loving, at-home parent – "functioning as a parent does
not bestow legal status as a parent."
Shannon Minter, an
attorney for the National Center for Lesbian Rights,
said if the losing mother, identified in court papers as
K.M., was a man, she would have been awarded rights to
the children who have moved with the birth mother to
Massachusetts and have little contact with the other
woman.
"This is just a tragedy
for our community. Our families are just as real as
anybody else's," Minter said. "These children are going
to be just as hurt as anybody else would by losing a
parent. Regardless of being married or not, if K.M. was
a man, she would have been automatically, without
question, a legal parent."
Minter based that
assertion on a California Supreme Court decision in 2002
that granted a non-biological father parental rights to
a child he helped rear since birth.
But the appeals court
based its decision on 1993 California Supreme Court
precedent in which a surrogate mother tried to back out
of giving her child to a married man and woman. The
Supreme Court held the adoptive parents were the lawful
parents because it was their intention, not the birth
mother's, to be the parents when the child was
conceived.
The losing mother in
Tuesday's case donated her eggs to her lover in 1995.
The women lived together in Marin County with the
children until recently, when they separated and the
birth mother moved with the kids.
The egg donor went to
court to assert parental rights. A lower court, and now
the appeals court, said she had none.
The case is K.M. v.
E.G., A101754.