Parenting rights in same-sex divorces headed to a Tennessee appellate court

[GURPS]

Parenting rights in same-sex divorces headed to a Tennessee appellate court



If Erica Witt were a man, she would have just as much right to a daughter conceived via artificial insemination as her spouse.

But in the first ruling of its kind in Tennessee, a Knox County judge on Friday opined that because she is a woman who legally married a woman, state law does not confer to her the power of decision-making over the child or the obligation to provide financial support for the girl now that the same-sex couple is divorcing.

"I believe this is a situation where (Erica Witt) has no biological relationship with this child, has no contractual relationship with this child," 4th Circuit Court Judge Greg McMillan ruled.

Erica Witt and Sabrina Witt legally wed in Washington, D.C., in April 2014, bought a home in Knoxville and decided to have a child via artificial insemination from an anonymous donor. Sabrina Witt bore a baby girl as a result in January 2015. Because Tennessee did not then recognize same-sex marriage as legal, Erica Witt's name was not placed on the baby's birth certificate.

 

[vraiblonde]

Well that is just bull#### and I'm getting pretty sick of Tennessee right about now.

 

[Merlin99]

A guy who's wrongly listed as the father of a kid is on the hook for child support for 18 years. There's no biological relationship or contractual relationship there either, I kind of see this as being changed pretty quickly.

 

[acommondisaster]

It makes perfect legal sense to me - not that legal sense is common sense.

With same sex marriages being upheld everywhere now, I guess this sort of thing would only pertain to those whose names don't appear on the birth certificate, and I'd hope that a petition to the court could get the name of both parents on the certificate now.

 

[GURPS]

It makes perfect legal sense to me - not that legal sense is common sense.

yep


if you are not genetically related or have adopted ..... you have no rights

 

[vraiblonde]

Let this be a lesson to same-sex couples who want to have children via artificial means: the non-bio parent needs to formally adopt the child and become a legal parent/guardian.

If you check the timeline, however, this is kind of a weird marriage, sex aside. They married in April 2014; nine months later they had a child; one month after that they filed for divorce. The whole thing from start to finish lasted less than a year, which tells me it was an act of impulse - both the marriage and the decision to bring a child into it. I'd like to hear the back story, not just the legalities. It may be that the bio mother has a valid reason to deny access to the child.

 

[GURPS]

They married in April 2014; nine months later they had a child; one month after that they filed for divorce.

the marriage barely lasted until pregnancy was completed ...
... it does not sound like they had a strong platform for a relationship