Gay Couple Essay
I. INTRODUCTION
Mary and Martha were a lesbian couple living together in Florida. They had been in a committed relationship for five years when they decided that they would like to have a child to complete their family. Due to age and health factors, the women decided that Mary would become pregnant using an anonymous sperm donor. During the pregnancy, Martha supported Mary and attended birthing and parenting classes with her. When the child was born, both women were listed on the birth certificate. They sent out birth announcements to friends that listed both women as the child's mother.
Because they lived in Florida, Martha was unable to adopt the child formally, but the two women signed an agreement stating that they were both the child's mother. Three years after the child's birth, Martha and Mary broke up. Mary moved out, took the child with her, and now refuses to allow Martha to see the child. Martha is distraught, and the child wants to know where her other mommy went. (1)
Under current law, Martha may have very little legal recourse: she is neither the child's biological nor adoptive parent. She stands as a legal stranger to the child, and a court could refuse to hear her claim for visitation. (2) A once happy family has been split up, and the child may never see her non-biological, non-adoptive (NBNA) mother again. This hypothetical situation could also be a reality for gay couples living in Arkansas, Florida, Mississippi, and Utah. These are the only states with statutes explicitly prohibiting homosexuals or homosexual couples from adopting children. (3) Without the ability to establish a legal relationship, the NBNA parent could be prevented from seeing her child after a relationship has ended, and a child could be cut off from a parent she has known her whole life. (4)
It is in the best interests of a child to continue a relationship with a NBNA parent if the homosexual couple breaks up. (5) In the four states examined in this
Mary and Martha were a lesbian couple living together in Florida. They had been in a committed relationship for five years when they decided that they would like to have a child to complete their family. Due to age and health factors, the women decided that Mary would become pregnant using an anonymous sperm donor. During the pregnancy, Martha supported Mary and attended birthing and parenting classes with her. When the child was born, both women were listed on the birth certificate. They sent out birth announcements to friends that listed both women as the child's mother.
Because they lived in Florida, Martha was unable to adopt the child formally, but the two women signed an agreement stating that they were both the child's mother. Three years after the child's birth, Martha and Mary broke up. Mary moved out, took the child with her, and now refuses to allow Martha to see the child. Martha is distraught, and the child wants to know where her other mommy went. (1)
Under current law, Martha may have very little legal recourse: she is neither the child's biological nor adoptive parent. She stands as a legal stranger to the child, and a court could refuse to hear her claim for visitation. (2) A once happy family has been split up, and the child may never see her non-biological, non-adoptive (NBNA) mother again. This hypothetical situation could also be a reality for gay couples living in Arkansas, Florida, Mississippi, and Utah. These are the only states with statutes explicitly prohibiting homosexuals or homosexual couples from adopting children. (3) Without the ability to establish a legal relationship, the NBNA parent could be prevented from seeing her child after a relationship has ended, and a child could be cut off from a parent she has known her whole life. (4)
It is in the best interests of a child to continue a relationship with a NBNA parent if the homosexual couple breaks up. (5) In the four states examined in this