News

Court Cases Cast Light on Gay Parenting Issues

by Matthew E. Pilecki
EDGE Contributor
Monday Jan 18, 2010
  • PRINT
  • COMMENTS (8)
  • LARGE
  • MEDIUM
  • SMALL
Gary Spino, Anthony Brown and son Nicholas
Gary Spino, Anthony Brown and son Nicholas  

When Sean Hollingsworth and his husband, Donald Robinson Hollingsworth, first held their twin daughters, neither foresaw the legal battle that would soon consume their lives. Due to a decision made by New Jersey Superior Court Judge Francis B. Schultz, the once-happy couple could lose primary custody of the twin girls they’ve raised over the past three years.

Angelica Robinson, Donald Robinson Hollingsworth’s sister, was named the legal mother to the twins despite the fact that there is no genetic relation. The girls were conceived in vitro in 2006 using a donated ovum and sperm provided by Sean Hollingsworth. The fertilized ovum was then implanted into the gestational surrogate, Ms. Robinson, who gave birth to the girls in October.

Treating Same-Sex Couples Like Others
Charles Kindregan, a Suffolk University Law School professor who specializes in reproductive technology law, disagrees.

"[Judge Schultz] seems unwilling to recognize the distinction between a case where the birth mother has a genetic connection to the child, and a case where the surrogacy is based on the intent that the two men would be the parents of the child that she is carrying for them," Kindregan told EDGE. "In recent years, more and more courts are willing to recognize the intended parent doctorate. Personally, I think the judge was wrong in this case."

Kindregan is working with the American Bar Association Family Advocate Committee in an effort to standardize surrogacy laws across the country, and he believes that same-sex couples seeking parenthood should not be treated any differently than infertile straight couples.

"I think it’s appropriate that the law think of infertility in the broadest sense of the word," he said. "The law should recognize the intent of the parties which is not that the surrogate should be the mother but that the intended parents should be the parents."

The case reveals the many risks and legal challenges that face LGBT couples pursuing alternative forms of parenting, and how those challenges vary from state to state. While surrogacy agreements are void and unenforceable in New York, California is generally accepting of them particularly when the couple seeking surrogacy has contributed some of the genetic material. In the case of Miller-Jenkins v. Miller-Jenkins, the custody battle crossed state lines with conflicting legislation.

"Don’s sister had graciously agreed to assist Don and me in starting a family by carrying the embryos that we created with my sperm and the egg of an anonymous donor," Hollingsworth said in an official statement. "It was always the understanding of all of us that Don and I would be the sole parents of the children, as reflected in deposition testimony and the many written documents that she signed over the course of many months."

Six months after giving birth to the twins, Ms. Robinson took her brother and his husband to court, claiming she had been forced to serve as the surrogate and was seeking custody of the girls. And now, as the legal mother, Ms. Robinson can pursue primary custody.

"After we entrusted her with the embryos that would become our children--relying on her commitment that she was helping us--she sought to take away what had become most precious to us," Hollingsworth said. "This litigation has important consequences not just for us, but for many infertile straight and gay couples in New Jersey that require use of reproductive technologies to start a family."

Judge Schultz’s decision drew on precedent established in New Jersey’s 1988 Baby M custody case. That involved a traditional surrogate whose own egg was fertilized in vivo through artificial insemination using sperm from a man who was part of a couple seeking to become parents. The case was settled by the New Jersey Supreme Court, which upheld the traditional surrogate’s rights as the genetic parent.

Crossing Ideological, Biological--& State--Lines
Janet Jenkins and her former partner Lisa Miller were joined in a civil union in late 2000, shortly after same-sex unions became legal in Vermont. Following their honeymoon, the couple decided they wanted to try for a baby. Miller became pregnant at an IVF clinic with donated sperm and gave birth to their daughter, Isabella Miller-Jenkins, in April 2002.

Jenkins never filed second parent adoption papers as she was told the civil union would protect her custody rights. However, just 17 months after giving birth to their daughter, Miller and Jenkins split. Miller moved to Virginia and asked the Vermont court to dissolve their union and sort out custody of their child.

Their union was officially dissolved in late 2003, and the Vermont court awarded Jenkins visitation rates on June 2004. Just one month later, Virginia enacted a new statute prohibiting any legal recognition of same-sex marriages or civil unions. Miller, who became a devout Baptist and renounced her homosexuality after moving to Virginia, filed for sole custody and won in accordance with the new law.

Later that year, Lambda Legal filed an appeal on behalf of Jenkins asking the Virginia court to honor the Vermont court order. During the two-year legal battle, Miller accepted pro bono representation from Mat Staver--founder of Florida’s Liberty Counsel, a legal firm that receives partial funding from the late Jerry Falwell’s Church.

Conversely, Jenkins accepted pro bono representation from Joseph Price, a Washington D.C.-based lawyer and board member of Equality Virginia. Staver argued that the Federal Defense of Marriage Act, a law that says states can deny recognition of same-sex marriages that are deemed legal in other states, allowed Virginia to overlook Vermont’s ruling.

Price persistently cited the Federal Kidnapping Prevention Act in hopes of winning Jenkin’s visitation rights back. The act was created specifically to stop parents from taking their kids to another state when they don’t agree with the original ruling

In June 2008, the Virginia court sided with Jenkins and her visitation rights were reinstated. However, Miller’s legal team continues to fight the ruling by petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case.

"Would it really make any difference if the word ’gestational’ was substituted for the word ’surrogacy’ in the [1988 ruling]?" Judge Schultz asked. "I think not."

Divorcing a Partner--Not a Child
After Miller repeatedly failed to allow Jenkins visitation, the court ordered custody to be switched from Miller to Jenkins. However, Miller has been missing with their daughter since Nov. 2009, and is currently being pursued by law enforcement for contempt of court.

’Problems for gay couples arise when state officials or state law have a narrow-minded view of parental qualifications that would regard same-sex couples as less suitable parents.’

"It would be like handing my child over to the milkman," Miller told Newsweek last year. "There is a homosexual agenda at work here, and Isabella is a pawn in their game."

Jenkins, who hasn’t seen her daughter since Jan. 2009, disagrees.

"I did not divorce my child, I divorced my partner," she said. "Yet I’ve missed out on my child’s kindergarten graduation. I’ll never get that back."

Cathy Renna, owner of Renna Communications and former news media director for GLAAD, and her wife, Leah McElrath Renna, conceived their daughter through artificial insemination.

"No matter how you look at it, this case is just heartbreaking," Renna told EDGE. "It is also a very stark example of why child custody and family law must address the growing number of LGBT families and provide the same rights and protections other families enjoy.

«The advent of the kinds of technology we now see used commonly makes it clear that the courts need to better understand and take into account the many diverse family structures that exist, in which all parties need and deserve equal treatment."

Is it Worth the Hassle? Yes!
Anthony Brown and his husband, Gary Spino,of Manhattan, recently became the proud parents of their son, Nicholas. And while parenthood came at a high price, the couple says every penny was worth it.

Brown, attorney at Albert W. Chianese & Associates, knew from the beginning that he wanted Spino to be the biological father of their child, but the couple also wanted the child to have some of Brown’s traits such as his eye color and ethnic background. The couple decided that they’d pursue gestational surrogacy, but it was important to both that the egg donor and surrogate mother were actively involved in the child’s life.

The couple spent countless hours hunting Circle Surrogacy’s, a Boston based surrogacy agency, profiles for egg donors that matched their criteria. Their search brought them to a mother in Florida who originally wanted to be an egg donor for her sister. The couple quickly booked a flight to meet the potential donor, and the three first met at the hotel where Brown and Spino were staying.

"We were nervous at first, but within five minutes Gary and her son were jumping on the bed together," Brown recalled. "We knew from that moment that this was going to work."

Brown said he was slightly more nervous about meeting the gestational surrogate, due to the possibility that the carrier might not want to give the baby up after carrying it for nine months. But his doubts were quickly dismissed after the couple met the surrogate and her husband in Virginia.

"[Her husband] told us he couldn’t wait for someone to put their hand on his wife’s belly and ask when she was do and he could say that he didn’t know because it wasn’t his," Brown said. "She laughed and said she couldn’t wait to say the same thing."

With all parties in agreement, the legal and lab work began. Nine months later, the gestational surrogate gave birth to a healthy boy in North Carolina. Brown said meeting his son for the first time was an experience he will never forget.

An ’Instant Connection’
"When we walked into the nursery, we didn’t even see his face but when we saw this little bundle across the room both of us just started crying," Brown told EDGE. "And it was this instant overwhelming connection and love like nothing else I’ve ever experienced before."

As an attorney, Brown and his partner took every necessary legal precaution including psychological evaluations and preparing life insurance. However, since the baby was born in North Carolina, Brown’s rights to his son still aren’t secure. The state has a mandatory 90-day waiting period before anyone can apply for a child’s birth certificate.

As of right now, Spino’s name is the only one on the birth certificate. Without a birth certificate, Brown couldn’t file paperwork for second parent adoption.

"I feel like I’m in a period of limbo," Brown said. "If anyone were to challenge my relationship with Nicholas, they could be successful. But we live in New York, so the reality is people are used to [same-sex parents]. At this stage, what I’m feeling right now is that I have this tenuous relationship with my son. If anything were to happen to me, even though we’ve prepared estate planning, there is no automatic protection for him."

But Take Precautions Before Birth
Brown will most likely be Nicholas’s legal guardian by March, but his worries aren’t unwarranted. Rebecca Dresser, Professor of Ethics in Medicine at Washington University Law School, warns LGBT couples to take every necessary precaution when pursuing surrogacy.

"Dealing with a good quality agency that conducts rigorous psychological and health screening and is diligent about securing informed consent provides protections," said Dresser. "The problems for gay couples would arise when state officials or state law, or both, have a narrow-minded view of parental qualifications that would regard same-sex couples as less suitable parents."

With the legal barriers, high costs, and potential risks some have questioned why Brown and Spino chose gestational surrogacy over adoption.

"For us, it was a personal and deeply considered choice," Brown said. "I am sure that if we had chosen adoption we would love our child as much as we love Nicholas, and that our families would embrace the child as much as they do Nicholas. But that is not the choice we made, and I thank God everyday that Nicholas is our son."

Comments

  • BB, 2010-01-18 08:59:30

    Who explains to the young daughters when they reach an age how to deal with their growing breasts, their periods, boyz sniffing around them demanding blow jobs, how you stay chaste, how to deal with the meanness of other little girls, what PMS feels like and how to deal with it, the expectations of motherhood, what to expect with a baby in your belly, how you feel with various kinds of birth control, how other women feel and what is going on almost every day of your uniquely female life? Huh? How is it two men think they have what it takes to raise a female child, or two women think they have a clue about the pressures of being a boy and dealing with the pressures of testosterone, male bonding, etc. Oh yes, it’s so very politically incorrect to dare suggest that a child is entitled to parents of both sexes, but in point of fact, THAT IS HOW NATURE INTENDED human children are raised. Sorry, I know it is a hanging offense to suggest in this oversensitive age that child raising and homosexuality might have even the slightest hint of a problem, but then of course who gives a shit about children when we’re talking about OUR RIGHTS?


  • Anonymous, 2010-01-18 09:34:22

    BB, what kind of moronic logic are you employing here? The same situation you describe happens in the millions of single-parent households everyday. My single mother had NO idea how to talk a teenage boy through all those awkward years, but she did the best she could, and we all turned out fine. Please stop reinforcing the archaic notion that children can ONLY ever be raised by two parents of different genders, because there are millions - possibly billions - of children who have been raised in all sorts of different situations.


  • BB, 2010-01-18 12:26:45

    Did you mother go out and purchase semen with the express purpose of keeping a man out of her life, just because she wanted to have children, or did it just happen? Nobody is saying that she did a poor job, but can you honestly tell us that there was not one time you didn’t wish you had a dad around? We are talking about DELIBERATELY denying children the opportunity to have both parents simply because some homosexuals want what they want and are unwilling to do what what it takes to do it. You said, "she did the best she could," and I’ll bet she did. That doesn’t make it an ideal situation.


  • Anonymous, 2010-01-18 14:45:51

    BB, do you take issue with the idea of single-parenthood, or is your primary issue with gay parenting? As you say, single parents don’t operate in an "ideal" child-rearing environment, but they DO have the opportunity to "do the best they can". Well then so should gay parents! I’m exhausted with whiny heterosexuals treating their commitments as a joke and taking their privileges for granted. Where are you when parents get divorced? Are you outside of the courthouse screaming in protest that "the state has an interest in children being raised by their biological parents" as suggested by Prop 8? Where are you when heterosexual parents completely and utterly FAIL in raising their children with any kind of morals or standards? Why do THEY have a chance to fail, and gay people are automatically denied the same OPPORTUNITY? To be politically incorrect and insensitive, "your" people are lazy and pathetic because you fail to completely follow through on your logic. You use these idioms like "children’s rights" and inflammatory words like "deserve" to hide the truth of what you really feel: you’re a homophobe. *shrugs* I don’t care if you’re a homophobe or not, personally, because I could care less about who you are or what you’re about. When you stand in my way with your misguided, pseudo-sanctimonious and lazy reasoning, I then take issue. Tell you what- I’d like a turn at fair play. Please give ME an opportunity to tell you how to raise your children or live your life, because I have a vested interest in how much of my tax resources they take up. Do you have any kids who are making less than a C average? I’d like to put them to work- school is clearly NOT for them, and we could use those resources elsewhere. How would that make you feel?


  • BB, 2010-01-18 15:14:03

    14:45 I don’t know if there is any point in trying to reason with you because you are obviously governed by irrationality and "feelings." First of all, I am gay, so you can drop the histrionic hate speeches right now. Secondly, I do not at all object to gay couples being permitted, in fact, encouraged, to adopt children who would otherwise grow up institutionalized or otherwise warehoused. Where I draw the line is in the vanity of allowing homosexuals to buy gametes and rent biological incubators in order to pass on their own genetic material. Using us to save children who would otherwise be lost in the system is noble, allowing us to create fresh children to grow up without one parent or another is immoral. We are homosexuals - we CANNOT REPRODUCE. Creating legal loopholes to satisfy our vanity is as ridiculous as asking Carnegie Hall to sponsor an all-Chopin concert when the person asking can’t even play the piano.


  • Anonymous, 2010-01-18 16:48:33

    There are no histrionic hate speeches, BB- just the simple fact that weak minded people have a tendency to sell themselves short, and in doing so they tend to want to sell everyone else short as well. Like I said, your homophobia is yours to own, but I do wish you were an adult with more of a moral backbone/mental wherewithal to stop trying to dictate how other people should/shouldn’t live their lives. If you want to maintain the ideal of the hetero-normative nuclear family construct, then do so on your own time. I happen to believe that it’s an incorrect assumption that "mom + dad + 2.4 kids = ideal" because if it were, people wouldn’t be as socially maladjusted in this country. It takes MORE than a mom and a dad to raise a child; it may be cliché, but it in fact does take a village to raise a child. I do agree with your argument for adoption: fostering bereft children is a responsibility we ALL have as a human species. However you imply that somehow homosexuals should be saddled with the responsibility of cleaning up the mistakes/unfortunate circumstances that heterosexuals have made/suffered. I refuse to believe that my God-granted role as a homosexual is to simply clean up after heterosexual people who have babies and then can’t/wont take care of them. You claim the argument of vanity being your justification for how you feel about the issue of gay procreation. By the same token, heterosexual couples who go through IVF are also guilty of vanity; are you suggesting that they should accept their infertility and succumb to raising someone else’s child by default. Are they vain? The urge to procreate is a biological imperative that we are programmed with in varying degrees, gay or straight. So OF COURSE gay people can reproduce- that’s how YOU got here! How many of your ancestors were gay men or gay women, forced to procreate in hetero-normative relationships to arrive at you, the conclusion of this age-old breeding program called humanity? Reproducing within a relationship is not a pre-requisite for procreation, as it has been clearly demonstrated within heterosexual relationships. Before you say it, I’ll say it for you: procreation for our species requires genetic mingling from two different sources- man and woman. My answer to you is that if you prefer to limit yourself by these constraints then do so for yourself: DO NOT MAKE THAT CHOICE FOR ME. Whether I decide to have children of my own has nothing to do with vanity; I want to raise my partner’s child. When I look at his baby pictures, I want to hold that baby in my arms and give it all of the love in the world. I also want to adopt; these are not mutually exclusive imperatives. I believe that every heterosexual couple should make an effort to adopt kids from this country. But I would never make that judgment for them, which is where the breakdown occurs in this country. Your self-righteousness and lack of imagination or personal strength should never become the basis of MY primary directives.


  • BB, 2010-01-18 17:48:18

    16:48 Articulately written, but superficially persuasive. Let’s get down to brass tacks. Your whole these is about you, about your feelings, your rights, your wants, your desires. However, look at the photograph that accompanies this article and answer this: Other than the selfishness and vanity of whichever of those two men is the sperm donor, what possible reason could there be to deny that baby a chance to experience the love of its mother?


  • ASSumptionsPeopleMake, 2010-01-19 11:31:10

    The "two men" are not trying to keep the children from knowing and loving their "birth mother". They are trying keep them from being embroiling in custody battle issues for 18 years. Read between the lines here... "unmarried" 44 year old. My guess is that it was his "gay" sister who didn’t want children and now understands the collateral she has against him. Did a research on the lawyer mentioned. He specializes in Malpractice cases!!! hmmm betting that there is more here than you "assume" and we know about assumptions!!!


Add New Comment

Comments on Facebook