Comments on: An unusual custody case? http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/01/20/an-unusual-custody-case/ An intellectual climate favorable to marriage Wed, 08 Feb 2012 21:17:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2 By: Ruth Institute Blog » Redefining parenthood http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/01/20/an-unusual-custody-case/#comment-1382 Ruth Institute Blog » Redefining parenthood Wed, 31 Mar 2010 21:23:19 +0000 http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=1175#comment-1382 [...] the sperm donor. They, the biological mother and father, want to raise the children themselves. I talked about this case when it was first reported. This scenario is one that many lesbian couples [...] [...] the sperm donor. They, the biological mother and father, want to raise the children themselves. I talked about this case when it was first reported. This scenario is one that many lesbian couples [...]

]]> By: Karen http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/01/20/an-unusual-custody-case/#comment-897 Karen Wed, 03 Feb 2010 22:52:24 +0000 http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=1175#comment-897 As a 'donor' conceived person with an active interest in all 'donor conception' related issues, I have been following these discussions and debates very closely over the past several years. I found a very interesting and insightful blog by a woman named Julie Shapiro who is a professor of law at the Seattle University School of Law. A recent debate on her blog on this very issue titled "Why Lesbians Might Think Before Using A Known Donor" raises many of the "bigger picture" concerns many of us share in common. Please read this - especially ALL of the comments (see link below --- line). It touches on biological parenthood vs. intent parenthood, mother's rights vs. father's rights vs. children's rights (who essentially have no rights), feminism and the cause and effects of separating sperm/egg/man/ woman from reproduction and responsibility. ----------- Why Lesbians Might Think Before Using A Known Donor January 24, 2010 · 42 Comments http://julieshapiro .wordpress. com/2010/ 01/24/why- lesbians- might-think- before-using- a-known-donor/ #comment- 2862 As a ‘donor’ conceived person with an active interest in all ‘donor conception’ related issues, I have been following these discussions and debates very closely over the past several years. I found a very interesting and insightful blog by a woman named Julie Shapiro who is a professor of law at the Seattle University School of Law. A recent debate on her blog on this very issue titled “Why Lesbians Might Think Before Using A Known Donor” raises many of the “bigger picture” concerns many of us share in common.

Please read this – especially ALL of the comments (see link below — line). It touches on biological parenthood vs. intent parenthood, mother’s rights vs. father’s rights vs. children’s rights (who essentially have no rights), feminism and the cause and effects of separating sperm/egg/man/ woman from reproduction and responsibility.
———–

Why Lesbians Might Think Before Using A Known Donor
January 24, 2010 · 42 Comments

http://julieshapiro .wordpress. com/2010/ 01/24/why- lesbians- might-think- before-using- a-known-donor/ #comment- 2862

]]> By: sperm donors wife http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/01/20/an-unusual-custody-case/#comment-809 sperm donors wife Thu, 21 Jan 2010 23:58:18 +0000 http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=1175#comment-809 OPPs.. .meant to say... ( living with the mother does NOT confer parental rights . ) OPPs.. .meant to say… ( living with the mother does NOT confer parental rights . )

]]> By: sperm donors wife http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/01/20/an-unusual-custody-case/#comment-808 sperm donors wife Thu, 21 Jan 2010 23:53:37 +0000 http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=1175#comment-808 I posted a bit on the Dallas Voice blog... Because I had a similar case in CA where the birth mother falsified the birth certificate. ( Falsely claiming she was married to my husband). I knew about the legalities of forms required to obtain a CA birth certificate. When there is a live birth in a hospital, the staff has the mother sign a declaration under penalty of perjury about the facts of the birth. CA Health and Safety code 102425 states exactly what can /can't be placed on the CA birth certificate. The first question is....ARE you married to the father of the child ? ...... if the answer is NO, then no name is placed in the father slot until there is a legal determination of paternity, as motherhood is not an issue. The woman who gave birth is the assumed legal parent. So criminal fraud was committed in this lesbian case..... and there is no presumption that the non bio lesbian is a parent. The birth certificate doesn't determine parentage. Contributing money (insurance plan) to the birth of a child does not establish parenthood. It is considered a gift of money. Living with someone / not registered as "partners", nor married confers parental rights. I am currently suing the State of Ca over another bizarre parental case where at issue is the unfair excluding of community property exemption rights of spouses in determining Child support for adulterous children, not of the marriage. (Think LIZ EDWARDS case) The state of Ca. DCSS claims that I don't have a right to a quarantine of 50% of my husband's earnings (which is by law, my property ) and thus I should pay for another woman's right to procreate with my property. Otherwise, the courts say I have to end my marriage (and get a court order) in order to have community property protections from debts I am not liable for. A wife's property and her marriage are apparently collateral damage for another interloper's "right to procreate". So much for CA protecting the institution of marriage ! spermdonorswife.wordpress.com I posted a bit on the Dallas Voice blog…
Because I had a similar case in CA where the birth mother falsified the birth certificate. ( Falsely claiming she was married to my husband). I knew about the legalities of forms required to obtain a CA birth certificate. When there is a live birth in a hospital, the staff has the mother sign a declaration under penalty of perjury about the facts of the birth. CA Health and Safety code 102425 states exactly what can /can’t be placed on the CA birth certificate.
The first question is….ARE you married to the father of the child ? …… if the answer is NO, then no name is placed in the father slot until there is a legal determination of paternity, as motherhood is not an issue. The woman who gave birth is the assumed legal parent.
So criminal fraud was committed in this lesbian case….. and there is no presumption that the non bio lesbian is a parent. The birth certificate doesn’t determine parentage. Contributing money (insurance plan) to the birth of a child does not establish parenthood. It is considered a gift of money. Living with someone / not registered as “partners”, nor married confers parental rights.

I am currently suing the State of Ca over another bizarre parental case where at issue is the unfair excluding of community property exemption rights of spouses in determining Child support for adulterous children, not of the marriage. (Think LIZ EDWARDS case) The state of Ca. DCSS claims that I don’t have a right to a quarantine of 50% of my husband’s earnings (which is by law, my property ) and thus I should pay for another woman’s right to procreate with my property. Otherwise, the courts say I have to end my marriage (and get a court order) in order to have community property protections from debts I am not liable for. A wife’s property and her marriage are apparently collateral damage for another interloper’s “right to procreate”. So much for CA protecting the institution of marriage !
spermdonorswife.wordpress.com

]]>