Pride Angel

The courts are all talking about same sex parenting disputes. The Court of Appeal has this week been hearing from a donor applying for contact with his biological son against a lesbian couple who say they feel “bitterness and betrayal” (the case has not yet been decided but you can read the coverage in the Telegraph here). This follows the decision just a few weeks ago by High Court judge Mr Justice Hedley (in P&L (minors) 2011, available here in full) which dealt with a very long and bitter dispute about the role of gay donor dads to two children (aged 10 and 6) being raised by their lesbian mothers. The courts are feeling their way with what they call new models of alternative parenting, and trying to develop an approach for these types of cases, which are far from traditional family law disputes.

Having advised many same sex parents (both at the planning stages and those who end up in dispute) we see some wonderfully successful co-parenting arrangements. But where they go wrong, they go horribly wrong. What is interesting, though, is that parents always seem to fall into one camp or the other. I can honestly say that none of the clients we have advised at the planning stage has ever come back for legal representation later. Equally, not one of the clients we have represented in disputes took legal advice at the outset.

So here are our tips on how to make your co-parenting or known donation arrangement a successful one, and how to avoid ending up in court:

Talk, talk, talk (and more importantly listen, listen, listen)

Don’t rush into trying to conceive. Get to know each other, have honest conversations about the roles you will have and how much involvement you all want. Be as clear as you can about your expectations and be honest with each other and yourselves. If things don’t feel right, have the courage to walk away. There are always other options. You could find another donor or co-parent, or choose unknown donation (as mums) or surrogacy (as dads) if what you really want is parental autonomy.

Understand what roles you will all have

Justice Hedley was keen to “stress the importance of agreeing the future roles of the parties before the first child is born“. And this fits with our experience. Almost all the cases we have seen which have ended up in dispute are ultimately about status. Is the biological dad a father or a donor? Are you equal co-parents, or primary and secondary parents, or parents with another adult role model? Make sure you talk about how you see yourselves and each other, as well as the day to day practicalities of managing your child’s care.

Understand how the law works

The law on parentage is complicated, and who will be the legal parents (and what goes on the birth certificate) depends on the facts, including how you conceive and the birth mother’s marital status. There may be all sorts of different options, both for choosing who the legal parents are and for giving some parental status to the other co-parents if you want to, and problems can often arise where parents have expectations (for example about what goes on the birth certificate) which can’t be met. Take legal advice, or check out the free information on our website about this.

Put in place a written agreement

Donor agreements may not (strictly) be legally binding, but they are incredibly useful. I have always advised parents that putting something in writing helps with the planning, facilitates honest conversations and sets a framework which everyone will feel morally bound by, giving clarity and transparency and setting a really strong foundation.

However, it now seems they may be more legally binding than we previously thought. Although the issue is still untested (the parents in P&L did not have a written agreement, which I suppose comes back to my point that it is not the parents with properly prepared legal agreements who end up in court) the case suggests that the court will pay attention if there is one. Mr Justice Hedley said, in the strongest indication yet, that “the court will be bound to give careful consideration and weight to any such agreement“.

There is no standard format for a donor or co-parenting agreement, but having something which is accurate and personal to you (and prepared with a solid understanding of how the law applies in your particular circumstances) will be much more helpful than any standard pro forma.

If you need help with planning a co-parenting or known donation arrangement, or if you need representation in a dispute, feel free to contact us.

Article: by Natalie Gamble Associates 10th February 2012

Read more about your legal rights when using a known donor at www.prideangel.com

A gay man who donated his sperm to enable his lesbian ex-wife to become pregnant is demanding overnight and holiday access to their two-year-old son. The woman and her female partner have instructed their lawyers to fight the man's demands on the basis he has 'betrayed' a 'pact' the threesome made before the baby was conceived, in which they allegedly agreed he would have 'limited' parental rights. The parents are not being named in order to protect the little boy's identity, but are reportedly all highly-paid professionals living in central London.

The father is said to have attended the baby's birth and currently has five hours of contact a fortnight with him. He claims he was always more than just a sperm donor, and now wants the right to have a full parenting role in his son's life. The Appeal Court heard that the man had been 'utterly consistent' in his desire to parent the little boy, and gained 'pleasure and joy' from interacting with his son.

The child's mum, however, says they had a 'clearly agreed' pact with the man before the baby was even conceived, which stated she and her female partner would be the 'primary parents' within a 'two-parent, nuclear family'. The court heard that the man was previously in a marriage of convenience with the woman which ended in divorce.

The Appeal Court judges are now being asked to rule whether the toddler would the better off with 'three parents and two homes'. The lawyer for the mum and her partner said the couple had been left with 'bitterness and betrayal' and would have used an anonymous sperm donor if they had known the dad would take this stance.

Charles Howard QC, told the court: "Notwithstanding their sexuality and that they acknowledge to that extent that they are an alternative family, the mother and her partner hold very traditional views of family life and would not have chosen to bring a child into anything other than an intact, two-parent, family.

"The ideal upbringing for a child is a stable home in which the parents love each other and had together chosen to bring a child into the world. This is the upbringing which the mother and her partner always wanted to create for this little boy. They were always of the view that their son's best interests militated against him spending very much time away from them or from his home.

"The intention was always that the father, who was at one time their close friend, would generally see the boy in their company by sharing in activities and family events. The breakdown of the friendship has had the result that the boy is spending far more time away from his primary parents than they had anticipated."

"To this couple, the concept of 'three parents, two homes' repeated so often by the father, is very alien and has never been something they could consider. This is something which they have had to accept but it represents a significant departure from their initial plans for their son's upbringing. They cannot conceive of their child being shuttled, physically but more significantly emotionally, between two homes and it is something that they believe will harm their son and cause significant emotional damage."

The dad's lawyer said his client had no desire to undermine the role of the mum and her partner as the child's primary carers, but wants sufficient contact with the toddler to enable a 'developing relationship' with his only son. What a messy situation!

This article shows the importance of setting out clear intentitions between recipients and donors prior to conception and that legal sperm donor agreements must be put in place to help with any possible future disputes. Read more about sperm donor legal rights.
www.prideangel.com

Article: 7th February 2012 www.parentdish.co.uk

TYING the knot in matching gowns, tiaras and hairstyles, lookalike lovers Anna Jones and Kirsty Cox were the picture of happiness But, a shadow of sadness marred the joy of the new Mrs and Mrs – they both dreamed of being a mum and feared it could never happen for them.

Anna, 28, and Kirsty, 23, loved caring for their little nieces and nephews but, unable to afford expensive fertility treatment, knew they would never be parents themselves. Until Anna’s sister Lorraine mentioned their plight to her hairdresser, Brian – and he agreed to help create their family.

With a sperm donor miraculously in place, the grateful couple decided to take it turns to try for a baby – expecting a long wait. But to their amazement Anna and Kirsty got pregnant within two weeks of each other, and gave birth just five days apart. Kirsty had daughter Scarlett-Marie, and then Anna produced son, Alfie. Now the pair are proud parents to two babies who are often mistaken for twins.

Beaming, Anna told the Mirror: “We are overjoyed. We’ve now got the perfect family although this time last year we thought we’d never have children of our own. “Brian has given us a wonderful gift and we are so grateful to him. It was a chance in a million that my sister’s hairdresser was thinking of becoming a sperm donor. “And the chances of Kirsty and I both getting pregnant at the first attempt must be pretty remote too!”

Anna and Kirsty, who live in Gloucester, had been together for six years but became civil partners in June 2010. Anna says: “It was the happiest day of our lives. But once we were married it brought home how much we wanted to be parents. “Every time my sisters’ children came to stay I’d tuck them into bed thinking, ‘I wish we could have a little one of our own’.

“We weren’t able to afford fertility clinics and knew we could be on the NHS waiting list for years. “We knew we’d make great parents, but told ourselves it probably wouldn’t happen and just had to accept it.” And that was that until sister Lorraine went to have her hair done and opened up to Brian.

Anna recalls: “Kirsty and I were watching TV when she got a text from Lorraine saying she’d found us a donor. “I thought Lorraine was just having us on and said, ‘Oh yeah?’ very sarcastically.” But moments later Anna’s phone rang. Anna says: “Lorraine told me her hairdresser was gay and understood how difficult it was for couples like us.” A week later Brian called round for tea.

Anna says: “He asked us loads of questions. Then he said we were lovely people and deserved the chance to be parents. “He didn’t want payment and he was happy to have no involvement in the child’s life if that’s what we wanted, so we knew there was no ulterior motive.” After a few more meetings and Brian proving he was in good health, the threesome agreed to start trying for a baby. But there was one problem.

Anna explains: “We both wanted to experience carrying a child and giving birth. So we decided it was fairest to take it in turns until one of us got pregnant.” The couple went online to learn how to artificially inseminate themselves using the donated sperm and a syringe, but when Brian arrived on the day were all nervous. Anna says: “We were giggling and kept chatting because we felt uncomfortable. But then I said, ‘Right, shall we get on with it?’ “I handed Brian a plastic beaker we’d bought especially for the job and Kirsty and I went into the bedroom and waited.”

Later, after they thanked Brian and he left, the couple agreed that Kirsty would go first and Anna did the insemination. Anna goes on: “Afterwards Kirsty lay on the floor with her feet up against the wall because we read that would increase the chances. I just thought this is never going to work.” A couple of weeks later Brian visited again for Anna. Then, a few days later Kirsty’s period was late. A first pregnancy test was negative, but the next day she did it again and was thrilled to find she was pregnant.

Anna recalls: “We were jumping around the kitchen with joy. We simply couldn’t believe this had happened on our first attempt.” Then two weeks later Anna started to get bad cramps. She says: “Kirsty kept joking that I was pregnant. But I thought ‘There’s no way.’ “But when my period didn’t arrive I did a test too. Positive. “We were in shock. I sent Brian a text telling him the news. He replied ‘Congratulations. I’m so happy for both of you’.

“When I went with Kirsty for her first scan the midwife thought we were sisters because we look so much alike.” And being pregnant together really strengthened their relationship. Anna says: “We got to feel each other’s bump when the babies started to kick. And it brought us even closer as a couple.” When Kirsty’s due date came and went they grew anxious. Anna says: “I kept telling her to hurry up because I was due soon.”

Anna and Kirsty wanted to be there for each other when the babies were born. But they became worried when the midwife told them they might go into labour at the same time. Anna recalls: “She said because we were two women living together our hormones were probably in sync.” At 16 days overdue, Kirsty went into hospital to be induced. Anna was by her side. Anna says: “She was squeezing my hand and I could feel my baby kicking. I was telling her to push but I felt scared because that was going to be me soon.” After 16 hours in labour, Kirsty gave birth to Scarlett-Marie. Anna says: “I held her and was laughing hard because she had little pursed lips just like Kirsty.”

Kirsty and Scarlett-Marie were kept in hospital for a couple of days before they could return to their home where Brian showed up at the front door with a huge bouquet of flowers in his hand. But later that day Anna started getting pains and the next day they were back at the hospital. Anna recalls: “This time around it was Kirsty holding my hand and telling me to breathe in and out.” After 48 hours in labour, Anna gave birth to her baby, Alfie. Anna says: “It was just absolutely amazing. Two babies born just five days apart.” Scarlett is now 11 weeks old and Alfie is just over 10 weeks.

Anna says: “We are loving every minute of being parents. We love watching them lying together and cooing to each other. It’s totally beautiful to see the bond between them. “And Brian visits the children almost every week. He is happy to be called Daddy, if that’s what we want. “When the children are older we will tell them that they were his amazing gift to us. We are just so grateful he helped us both become mums.” Brian’s name has been changed to preserve his anonymity.

Article: 23rd January 2012 www.mirror.co.uk

Lesbian? looking for a sperm donor? register for FREE at www.prideangel.com

A Florida court has granted equal parental rights to two lesbian women who created a child using the eggs from one of the women, while the other carried the baby to term. It ruled that egg donors may acquire parental rights to children resulting from their gametes under the Florida and US Constitution.

The couple, who have now separated, were involved in custody proceedings over the child, born in 2004, after the woman who provided the eggs sought legal parental status. The birth mother – who under Florida law was automatically considered to be the child's legal mother – reportedly left for Australia with the child, before returning to the USA. The sperm was provided by an anonymous donor who waived all his rights over the child.

A circuit judge initially made a ruling in favour of the birth mother, but the decision was later overturned by the Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal in December last year. The court said that Florida law, which grants parental status to the woman who carries the child only, is out of date and violates the US Constitution.

According to the Orlando Sentinel newspaper, the court said: 'This is a unique case, and the appellate courts in Florida have never before considered a case quite like it'.

Under UK law, the birth mother – who carries the child - is considered to be the child's legal mother even if she has no genetic connection to the child. The law was recently updated to recognise same-sex couples as legal parents of children. The partner of a lesbian birth mother in a civil partnership can now be considered in law to be the child's second parent, if the child was born after 6 April 2009, and can be named on the child's birth certificate. The situation is, however, more complex where the couple is not in a civil partnership.

Speaking about the Florida case to the Sentinel, Professor Nancy Polikoff, who specialises in family law at the American University Washington College of Law, said: 'Any ruling that supports the right of a same-sex couple... is important for its willingness to recognise that these families exist and a child raised in this environment shouldn't be forced to give up a parent'.

The case has reportedly been passed back to the trial judge to determine details of custody, visitation and child-support.

Article: 9th january 2012 www.bionews.org.uk

Read more about lesbian parenting and legal rights when using known donors.