Articles Tagged with “assisted reproductive law”

MJ-Avvo-200x300 KVPhotoWebsiteNew-200x300Harden Jackson attorneys Michele Jackson and Katherine Schwartz will present the CLE “Hoosier Baby? An Intro to Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Law in Indiana on July 28th, 2017 from 12:00 PM-1:00 PM as part of the Indiana State Bar Association Brown Bag Series. The presentation will take place at the Indiana State Bar Association office, One Indiana Square, Suite 530, Indianapolis, Indiana  46204. This CLE, available live and as a Webinar, is geared toward judges, family law practitioners, and professionals interested in learning about the rapidly growing field of

Assisted Reproductive Technology (“ART”) law. If unable to attend in person, a live stream is available as well. Click here to register and view more information.

The official description of the CLE is as follows:

Shttps://www.indianafamilylawyerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/285/2017/07/pinterest-icon-logo-D4965B6748-seeklogo.com_.pngocial media site, Pinterest, recently added adoption and surrogacy benefits for its 500 employees. Pinterest’s employees will be eligible to receive up to $5,000 in adoption reimbursement and up to $20,000 for surrogacy benefits. Pinterest already provides 16 weeks of paid parental leave, as well as up to $20,000 in fertility benefits. Pinterest head of diversity and inclusion, Candice Morgan, stated, “Our [team] often speaks with employees to learn more about how we should expand our benefits, and we recently spoke with a colleague who’s been considering surrogacy with his husband.”

Pinterest is not the only company that provides fertility and adoption benefits. American Express offers five months of paid leave across genders, along with $35,000 to assist with adoption and surrogacy. Ernst & Young offers up to $25,000 for same-sex and heterosexual couples to cover adoption, surrogacy, and egg freezing services. Johnson & Johnson has also increased its benefits for surrogacy, adoption, and fertility services. As adoption, fertility treatment, and surrogacy become more common forms of family-building, companies will need to follow the lead of those mentioned in this blog post and expand the scope of their benefits to meet the needs of their employees.

The attorneys of Harden Jackson Law are devoted to servicing clients in all areas of family law, including divorce, custody, child support, property division, paternity, post-divorce modifications, prenuptial and postnuptial agreements, simple wills, adoption, surrogacy, and other areas of reproductive law. For more information, please contact us at 317.569.0770 or www.hardenjacksonlaw.com.

nevada-43769_960_720-215x300Nevada recently passed a new law that significantly improves surrogacy and adoption laws in the state. First, it gender neutralizes all adoption and assisted reproductive technology statutes. The law, effective July 1, 2017, will now refer to an “acknowledgment of paternity” as an “acknowledgment of parentage.” This strips away the old language and allows the law to recognize the variety of family types and structures that exist today. Nevada attorney Kimberly Mae Surratt, who helped get these laws passed, commented, “we gender neutralized every single statute in the State of Nevada and it was done with bipartisan support.” The changes in adoption laws include that petitioners to an adoption don’t have to live in the state of Nevada to adopt in the Nevada, which used to only allow non-residents petitioners to adopt if the child was in custody of an agency which provided child welfare services.

This new statue also expands the ability to obtain a parentage order in the state. In surrogacy arrangements, parentage orders can now be obtained in these situations: the child was born in Nevada or is anticipated to be born in Nevada; the Intended Parents reside in Nevada or resided there when the contract was executed; the Gestational Carrier resides in Nevada; the contract was executed in Nevada; and medical procedures were performed in Nevada. This long list of ways to obtain a parentage order largely facilitates the surrogacy process for all parties involved. Nevada is one of few states that have recently made large leaps in dispensing with old laws that address family building; replacing them with much more progressive ones.

The attorneys of Harden Jackson Law are devoted to servicing clients in all areas of family law, including divorce, custody, child support, property division, paternity, post-divorce modifications, prenuptial and postnuptial agreements, simple wills, adoption, surrogacy, and other areas of reproductive law. For more information, please contact us at 317.569.0770 or www.hardenjacksonlaw.com.

ME_23_00_sm-150x150Earlier this year, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court upheld the Rockland District Court’s decision that found a de facto parentage relationship between Jessica Lisio’s two biological children and her transgender domestic partner, Tammy Thorndike. Lisio and Thorndike, who identifies as male, began a relationship and decided to have a child together. In 2009, Lisio and Thorndike registered as domestic partners and later Lisio gave birth to their daughter. Their relationship began to fall apart a few months later, but Thorndike and Lisio maintained their existing parental roles. Thorndike finally moved out and two years later, filed a complaint for a determination of paternity and parental rights and responsibilities, which Lisio opposed, arguing that Thorndike had no parental rights. The Court found that “Thorndike undertook a permanent and responsible parental role in the children’s lives”, and that the children would be negatively affected if Thorndike was removed from their lives.

This case is a prime example of how the laws and court system are delayed and could have been avoided had the two parties taken proactive steps to establish their parental rights and responsibilities. In this case, a second-parent adoption lets the non-biological parent adopt a child without the biological parents losing their rights. Also, if the relationship ends, it still allows the adoptive parent to have custody and visitation rights. It’s important to keep in mind that Indiana has become one of a handful of states that now puts both biological and non-biological married same-sex parents on the birth certificate. Therefore, a second-parent adoption is not always necessary in this scenario. Meet with an experienced adoption and reproductive law attorney to learn more about when a second-parent adoption may be required.

In the many states that don’t recognize second-parent adoption, there is the option of a co-parenting agreement which lays out the intentions of the parents regarding the care of the children. This will help protect the intent of the non-biological parent toward the care of the child in the event that the relationship ends. This decision also strengthens the case for establishment of parentage in non-biological parents that use donor egg, which can sometimes arise in a gestational surrogacy. Many states don’t have clear laws on whether parentage can be established using donor egg, so taking intent into consideration fortifies the argument for establishment of legal parentage in non-biological parents.

missouri-state-flag-150x150In late 2016, The Missouri Court of Appeals upheld the decision that pre-embryos were “marital property of a special character” and could not be used to have a child without the consent of both parties. The parties to this case are Jalesia McQueen and then husband Justin Gadberry, who decided to freeze Gadberrys’ sperm just before he was deployed to Iraq. While Gadberry was overseas, the couple discussed In Vitro Fertilization (“IVF”) and just months later two of the four embryos were implanted in McQueen’s uterus. McQueen gave birth to twin boys and froze the other two embryos at a cryobank facility. The couple later divorced and a dispute regarding the disposition of their frozen embryos arose during their divorce proceedings. This dispute quickly turned into a legal case to determine when exactly life begins and the legal status of frozen embryos. The Court of Appeals upheld the trial court’s decision that frozen-embryos cannot be used without the consent of both McQueen and Gadberry. The Court further ruled that frozen embryos are not considered persons. Rather, they are considered the property of the two parties involved.

Judge Robert M. Clayton III wrote the majority opinion, stating that awarding joint custody “subjects neither party to any unwarranted governmental intrusion but leaves the intimate decision of whether to potentially have more children to the parties alone.” The court made it clear in the decision that they were not determining when life begins, but just interpreting the legal status of embryos in Missouri. The Court ruled that embryos have no legal claim to the same protections as a human being under Missouri law, and that forcing the husband to have a child that he doesn’t want to have violates his privacy rights. McQueen is planning on appealing the decision. After the ruling was issued, she stated “It’s part of me, and what rights do the judges or the governments have to tell me I cannot have them?”

Tim Schlesinger, Gadberry’s attorney, commented “I think today’s ruling is a victory for individuals against unjustified government intrusion.” Schlesinger hopes that this case will provide guidance to other states that are facing similar issues. This issue will likely arise in numerous states at some point, as IVF becomes more prevalent. Click here to read our blog post about the legal status of frozen embryos to learn more about where several states stand on this question.

Spain
Last month, the Supreme Court of Spain issued a landmark ruling that recognizes the right to paid maternity leave for parents of children born through surrogacy. Although gestational surrogacy is illegal in Spain, the Court held that the need to take care of children outweighs any legal barriers set forth by Spain’s surrogacy ban. The decision also extends various rights to mothers of children born through surrogacy, such as a reduced workday for nursing mothers and the right to take one year of unpaid leave after the maternity leave. Spaniards who seek to build their family through surrogacy must go abroad, and two such scenarios, one involving a surrogacy arrangement in the United States and the other in India, set this case in motion.  In October, Spain’s congress also voted to equalize paternity and maternity leave, awarding fathers the same sixteen weeks of paid maternity leave that mothers receive.

The decision comes at a time when the issue of maternity benefits is in the spotlight in the United States.  A New Jersey woman is suing her former employer, Verizon Network Solutions, for denying her paid maternity leave when she had children through surrogacy in 2013. Various arguments exist for both sides of the issue. For example, some posit that since mothers of children born to a gestational surrogate did not give birth, they do not need time to recover physically. This argument is often used to justify the denial of extended paternity leave for fathers. On the other hand, proponents of maternity benefits for mothers of children born through surrogacy contend that a new mom needs time to bond with the baby, especially when she did not carry the child.

Although the Verizon lawsuit is one of the first of its kind (there was a federal lawsuit to claim benefits for paid leave by a woman who had children through surrogacy in 2011, but the case was ultimately dismissed), this issue is likely to become more prevalent as gestational surrogacy continues to grow as a family-building option. Stay tuned to our blog for more discussions on emerging reproductive law issues.

Phone App
The London Sperm Bank just launched the United Kingdom’s first sperm donor app, nicknamed by news outlets as the “Tinder for Sperm Donors.”  Individuals can use the app to search for sperm donors and order sperm on their phones. The free app , considered the first of its kind, displays donor profiles that describe physical characteristics, medical history, the sperm bank’s staff impressions, and other information (check out this Cosmopolitan article for some examples). Users can set preferences for characteristics such as eye color, hair color, education, and personality, and receive an alert when a donor matching their criteria is available. In contrast to dating apps like Tinder, donor profiles are anonymous and do not contain photos. Donors are vetted by the London Sperm Bank and pay a fee to be listed on the app.

The app has been approved by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (“HFEA”); the UK’s regulating entity that oversees IVF research, clinics, and procedures. However, the app has also generated some ethical debate. A representative of the Comment on Reproductive Ethics group stated that the app constitutes “trivialisation of parenthood,” equating it to “reproduction via mobile phone.” Meanwhile, the London Sperm Bank issued a statement assuring that “Ordering sperm from an online catalogue or an app does not trivialise treatment, and every step meets the requirements of the HFEA.” Additionally, the scientific director of the London Sperm bank stated “you make all the transactions online, like you do anything else these days. This allows a woman who wants to get a sperm donor to gain control in the privacy of her own home and to choose and decide in her own time.”

We are curious to see the impact of the app and whether other sperm banks follow suit. Has this app revolutionized gamete donation as we know it? Only time will tell. Stay tuned to our blog for more updates on the app as it gains traction among individuals seeking sperm donors.

8-10-09-193-thumb-667x1000-60849As gestational surrogacy continues to increase in the United States, so do opportunities to observe its trends and outcomes. Many states presently permit gestational surrogacy, although the laws vary by state and are rapidly evolving. Researchers from the University of Iowa Hospital and Clinics, Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility compiled information regarding the below trends arising from the continued practice of gestational surrogacy in the United States:

  • In the past 15 years, the number of gestational carrier cycles has grown by more than 470%.
  • Almost 70% of fertility clinics throughout the country now offer gestational surrogacy.

Constitutional
A California woman, Melissa Cook, who agreed to act as a surrogate for a single man, is seeking custody of one of the children after giving birth to triplets. The intended father allegedly requested a reduction, as he only wanted twins. Cook is challenging the constitutionality of a clause in the contract that allegedly allowed the intended father to request a reduction.

Californian law currently permits commercial surrogacy, but Cook is aiming to change that, hoping that the court will deem both the contract and the law unconstitutional. Cook’s lawyer claims that children born through a surrogacy arrangement have a “fundamental right to get to know and love their mother,” and that the current law in California violates that right.

After a state court ruled against her, Cook appealed and is now waiting for a decision. The court will determine whether a surrogate mother has any parental rights and whether commercial surrogacy is constitutional. The court will also consider whether a surrogate may be sued for damages by an intended parent.

Donor eggs.jpeg
Denmark’s parliament has decided to nearly triple the pay that women who donate eggs may receive. There has been a shortage in available donor eggs, which has led some women to go abroad in search of egg donors, where the cost is far greater. This decision is expected to increase the number of donor eggs, which will make it easier for Danish citizens to have children.

The parliament’s decision seems to follow a trend of easing restrictions on egg donation. As in Kamakahi v. ASRM et al., where limits on compensation to egg donors were struck down, Denmark’s parliament chose to change an overly restrictive limit on compensation. In Kamakahi, the overturned guidelines stated that payments exceeding $10,000 were “not appropriate.”

Earlier this year, the parties in Kamakahi reached a settlement after four years of litigation. The terms of the settlement include the removal of the language stating that “[t]otal payments to donors in excess of $5,000 require justification and sums above $10,000 are not appropriate. “The ASRM has also agreed not to make any future dollar amount recommendations for donor compensation. Although the settlement did not result in a monetary award for the class members, they are permitted to file an individual lawsuit to recover damages.