More on parental rights in surrogacy cases (Raftopol)

This decision has some pretty far reaching implications.  In the article quoted below from the Connecticut Law Tribune, there is a great statement:

The court applied the rule that the legislature is presumed not to draft statutes creating absurd results.

In this situation, the surrogacy contract plainly stated that the birth mother would relinquish all parental rights to the child(ren) but the law still stated that the biological parents must be listed on the birth certificate. This, of course, goes against the contract. That has now, or is in the process of, being corrected.

Here’s a bit more explication:

That’s the ruling in Raftopol v. Ramey, a watershed decision that creates a new fourth way to legally become a parent, in addition to conception, adoption or artificial insemination. Victoria Ferrara, the Fairfield surrogacy lawyer who represented the fathers in this case, said: “It’s a tremendous benefit to any couple who have to use donated genetic material – egg donor or sperm donor. So whether it’s a gay male couple or a straight couple, that couple can now establish legal parental rights ahead of the birth of the child, so the child is then born with two legal parents. That’s crucial. It’s crucial to the child, and it’s crucial to the couple having the baby.”

Attorney Karen Loewy filed an amicus curiae brief for Boston-based Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD)

“This is really a wonderful precedent,” she said. “When you have a couple who has entered into this agreement, they are the parents. The importance is honoring the intentions of the family, and [legally] protecting the children from the moment of their birth.”

The Jan. 5 decision legally made a father of Shawn Hargon, who is married to Anthony Raftopol. The two men entered into a gestational surrogacy agreement with Karma A. Ramey, of Connecticut. She was then implanted with donated eggs that had been fertilized by Raftopol in vitro and frozen. Ramey carried the fertilized eggs to term, producing twins. In the contract, she agreed to relinquish any parental claims and to support adoption by Hargon.

However, Connecticut’s artificial insemination law, as read by the state Supreme Court, suggests that only “biological or adoptive parents have parental rights with respect to the subject children.”

This meant, that if Raftopol had died before their birth, the twins might have arrived legally parentless, and not entitled to inherit from their biological father, a New York business lawyer who works in Europe. The Raftopol-Hargon family lives in Holland.

In addition, Hargon would have had to go through a time-consuming adoption process to attain parentage of the twins, even though all parties to the agreement already viewed the baby boys as his own. Karma Ramey, who would appear on the original birth certificate as mother, had contractually disclaimed parental rights. Nevertheless, without Raftopol, she might be pressed by the state to act as the boys’ mother, Raftopol explained in an interview with The Law Tribune. “Nobody wanted any of these things to happen,” he said.

The whole article — well worth reading — is at the link below

http://www.ctlawtribune.com/getarticle.aspx?ID=39424

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: