More disputed lesbian custody cases:Second class mothers?
Two more disputed lesbian custody cases are coming in Ohio. both these cases have the following features:
1. a biological mother does not want her former lesbian partner to have parental rights over her child.
2. the former partner and the mother dispute many details of their relationship to each other and their agreement regarding the child.
3. no second party adoption was done, although in one case, “But before the child was born, Mullen (the biological mother) signed legal documents naming Hobbs (her lesbian partner) as Lucy’s co-parent. After the couple broke up, Mullen voided that agreement.”
Without knowing what this agreement actually said, it is hard to know what is going on here. But what is clear, is that adoption is the traditional way the law has attached parental rights to people who are not biologically related to the child. With that in mind, listen to this chilling statement:
Camilla Taylor, a senior staff attorney for Lambda Legal, an advocacy group for gays, said Ohio law recognizes the parental rights of people who have no biological relationship with a child.
“A disturbing number of biological parents are asking the high court or intermediate courts in Ohio to revisit laws that protect children and the rights of nonbiological parents in Ohio,” Taylor said.
Unlike the former Cincinnati couple, Smith and Rowell never signed documents defining their legal relationships with Madison. But Rowell’s attorneys say that doesn’t matter: By relinquishing parental responsibilities to Rowell, Smith made her a co-parent in the eyes of the law.
What exactly does it take to “relinquish parental responsibilities” to someone?
The two women disagree vehemently about almost every detail of Madison’s upbringing, beginning with the girl’s conception. Rowell asserts that she inseminated Smith with the sperm of a donor; Smith insists that a medical professional did so.
Smith says she made all the important decisions regarding the girl’s life: schooling, her baptism, finances, medical care. Rowell says she took part in those decisions.
Smith says Madison refers to her ex-partner as “Julie,” while Rowell says the girl calls her “Moolie,” a blend of “Mom” and “Julie.”
Smith said: “There was no expectation at all that she would be anything other than a friend and a support to Madison and me. It was two women living in a house, and a child was there. We did not take vacations together or live as a family together.”
Rowell shakes her head at that characterization. She shows a studio portrait of the two women and the girl posed as a family, and a picture of Madison’s baptism, at which both women were present.
“Maddie believes that she has two moms and two parents who raised her equally — in every way,” Rowell said. “I parented Maddie financially, emotionally and in every other way.”
The family courts get to adjudicate who counts as a parent, based on these intimate details of family life. Who exactly wants courts to be making these kinds of inquiries? Who in their right minds believes that freedom, liberty and dignity are increased by expanding the jurisdiction of the courts into these areas?
We have legal tools at our disposal to attach children to people who are not related to them: it is called adoption. If these women had agreed to a second party adoption after the birth of the child, there would be no dispute. Both women would count as parents.
I suspect that the reason they didn’t do an adoption is quite simple: the bio mom didn’t really want to. She didn’t really want to share her child with another woman.
So, why should a perfectly fit mother lose custody of her own child, just because she had a sexual relationship with another woman? The Gay Lobby seems convinced that anything short of “marriage equality” makes them “second class citizens.” It seems to me that in cases like these, the biological mother with a lesbian partner has become a second class mother.
Loading ...
“But before the child was born, Mullen (the biological mother) signed legal documents naming Hobbs (her lesbian partner) as Lucy’s co-parent. After the couple broke up, Mullen voided that agreement.”
The Legal document was her Will. Which was legally revoked before the case was filed.
I will also mention that in Ohio, gays cannot adopt together. However, in 2002 the Ohio Supreme Court, ruled that same sex couples could enter into a co-custody agreement. It has been litigated that both of these couples knew this option, discussed it and didn’t execute.
We’re seeing this kind of intrusiveness more and more lately, especially in family court. Couples who didn’t marry each other — on purpose — asking the court to treat them as if they had married, once they separate. So-called “parents” who didn’t adopt — on purpose — asking the court to treat them as if they had adopted. And ultimately, well-meaning legislators crafting new laws designed to “help out”, by treating those who deliberately did not marry or adopt as if they had.
Brave new world. Where’s my nanny???
I am responding to the premise: “Adoption exists to give children the parents they need, and not parents the children they want.”
While you have clearly shown that adoption has to consider the needs of the children first, I don’t think it’s clearly an either or situation. In the author’s case, it actually began with the parent’s desire for children. It is a match of needs and desires. Clearly, the children’s needs come first, but I don’t think the latter should be excised from the equation.
The statement helps to make a point in the case of same-sex adoption, but it is hard to accept as a true statement on its own.
I lost a parent due to death, when I was very young but old enough to remember. The youngest children may not even have the capacity to remember these breakups, but we know that they can have disastrous effects from decades of research. My heart just aches for these children who are caught between two (or more) adults, who have obviously not carefully considered the consequences of their decisions, legal or otherwise. We may need a law to control how fertility clinics operate; just as adoption laws protect children, donor children need to be protected, too.
This article nails it!! My daughter was in a lesbian relationship when SHE decided to undergo fertility treatments to have a child. SHE paid for everything. There was NO co-parenting agreement and NO adoption. They were roommates for 3 years…partners only for a year following the birth. Yet she has sued for joint custody. Judge has awarded my daughter sole legal custody but has paved the way for other woman to have joint physical custody. My granddaughter is 4, has not seen this woman in more than a year. My daughter is outraged! Her lawyer is appealing to NM Court of Appeals. Why do these lebian women think they have more rights than any live in boyfriend who is not the child’s father would have? Our justice system has made biological mother’s rights a mockery!!
@Marian Davis
Ms. Davis,
You have OBVIOUSLY only heard your daughter’s side of this tragic story. My partner and I raised 3 children for 13 years and she did NOT allow me to legally adopt them. They were all adopted and I have raised them all since they were babies. I was not a LIVE IN and more than likely your daughter’s partner was not either. Let me take a wild guess…. Is your daughter somewhat CONTROLLING? The real tragedy is to the children. Why don’t you try looking at this from the other side of the fence. Another mother has lost her child and a child has lost her other mother. I don’t care what a piece of paper says.
Jill…13 years is a whole lot longer than the 2.5 involved with my daughter. Why didn’t you have the children?? My daughter’s partner WAS a live in…they had no “partner” relationship from the time my daughter was pregnant. If a bio mom does not allow you to adopt, then have your own! I can’t understand why anyone would want to ceate some artificial parenting role just because they are lesbian. The only way to be a parent is to either biologically have a child or legally adopt a child. That is it! If a bio mom does not allow someone to adopt then so be it. Even when a man and woman are divorced and remarry, it is the biological parents who make a decision about a child’s adoption with a new spouse. You cannot make a biological mother a second class citizen because she happened to be involved in a lesbian relationship. If you had been a man you would have no rights to any children that were not yours either biologically or legally. That is as it should be. There is an avenue for lesbian women to be parents. It is called adoption or pregnancy!!!