05/12/2012
Modern Science Creates Life By In Vitro Fertilization;
Yet We Still Bastardize Our Children -
In recent years, there has been an enormous increase in GLBT use of In vitro fertilization (IVF), surrogacy and adoption across the world. In case you’ve been living under a rock somewhere, IVF means fertilization outside of the body. Last year, I helped to facilitate the adoption of six children conceived through surrogacy in India. It was during the third adoption that the judge stopped the proceeding and made me explain the legal process by which the children are allowed to depart India and enter the United States. Well, the difficult explanation was how they got into the surrogates. The great news is that doors have opened up all over the world for the GLBT community. The unfortunate news is that the dollars are not always being spent right here in the most advanced medical community in the world, Houston, Texas. Local surrogacy is simply cost prohibitive for most.
In addition to the excessive cost, our state legislature has seen fit to implement a law that provides protections for one group of citizens and not all others utilizing surrogacy. While there are various types of surrogacy available, gestational surrogacy is the only one recognized by the Texas Family Code. The gestational mother carries a fertilized embryo that is implanted in her by assisted reproduction. The embryo is comprised of either the intended mother’s egg, or a donor egg, and the intended father’s sperm, or donor sperm. Therefore, the child is not biologically related to the gestational mother or her husband. In order for a gestational surrogacy agreement to be validated, Section 160.754 of the Texas Family Code requires that the intended parents be married to each other and that each intended parent be a party to the gestational agreement. If you fit this pattern, then you are allowed to submit your agreement to the court and have your parental rights established in advance of the child's birth. Your child’s birth certificate will automatically list you as the biological parent(s) without any reference to the surrogate. This protection is huge in family law and affordable.
However, if you are not married, then you are SOL. You can file your agreement, but the court will not enforce it. For example, Chi and Don are members of the Houston Gay and Lesbian Parents Group and currently expecting two sets of twins under two different surrogacy agreements. They received eggs from a donor female which were fertilized with Chi’s sperm then implanted into the two women. As a result, the surrogates have no biological ties to the children. While it’s perfectly legal for non-married and/or GLBT persons to enter into surrogacy agreements, the non-biological surrogate is automatically presumed to be the child’s parent and therefore named on the birth certificate. Chi will have to file a Petition to Adjudicate Parentage in order to establish himself as the children’s’ father and a Petition to Terminate the Parent Child Relationship between the surrogate and the child.
By now you may be thinking that there is no real issue since married, non-married, straight and GLBT persons are all allowed to enter into surrogacy agreements for the birth of their children. To begin with, you will spend much more money for legal fees if you are not a married heterosexual couple. Then, you risk the chance of the surrogate challenging your right as the child’s parent which tends to increase after the birth of the child; and it’s very difficult to provide protections if the surrogate mother puts the unborn child at risk.
My initial thought is that of the children’s rights. In 1972 the US Supreme Court heard the case of Garcia v. Perez, from a lower court which had ruled that unmarried fathers were not obligated to provide support to the mothers of their illegitimate children. The Supreme Court ruled in 1973 that the laws of Texas could not constitutionally grant legitimate children a judicially enforceable right to support from their natural fathers and at the same time deny that right to illegitimate children. Furthermore, the duty to support exists despite the fact that the father may not have custody of the child. Hooten v. Hooten, 15 S.W.2d 141. Any law that provides greater rights and/or protections to children born of a marriage above others not born of a marriage effectively bastardizes the child and promotes the social stigma. Section 160.202 of the Texas Family Code entitled “NO DISCRIMINATION BASED ON MARITAL STATUS,” states that a child born to parents who are not married to each other has the same rights under the law as a child born to parents who are married to each other.
My question then is whether or not a child with married parents that are afforded the protections of a surrogacy agreement receives any greater benefit than a child with unmarried parents that are not otherwise afforded the same protections of a surrogacy agreement, whether the child is born or unborn.
In 2003, the Texas Legislature passed the Prenatal Protection Act which named the unborn children of Texas individuals from fertilization to natural death. The law does not distinguish the unborn children of married, unmarried, straight or gay parents; but simply protects unborn children as an “individual” and a “person.” If this is the case, then the unborn child is entitled to due process and afforded rights under the Texas Constitution which includes the enforceable right to support from their natural fathers [and natural mothers] , keeping in mind something as simple as the issuance of a birth certificate, establishment of parentage or availability to health insurance. Although the social conservatives within the Texas Legislature implemented the Prenatal Protection Act in 2003 for the purpose of limiting abortion, it was also 2003 when they implemented the marriage requirement for the protection of the biological parents in gestational agreements. Until Texas removes the requirement of marriage for the protection in gestational agreements, we continue to bastardize our children not born of a marriage.
It sure seems the basis of a good challenge for overturning another discriminatory bastardizing statute.
Gay Couples, Gay Surrogacy, GLBT Parents,