Yesterday, Massachusetts’ highest court heard the case of a nonbiological mother fighting for legal parentage of the two children she planned and raised with a former partner.
Mary Bonauto, the attorney (and mom) who argued for marriage equality in Massachusetts before arguing it at the U.S. Supreme Court in the landmark Obergefell v. Hodges, also presented this case. You’d think Massachusetts, which led the way in marriage equality, would be in the forefront of equality here, too—but no. The nonbio mother’s complaint to establish legal parentage was dismissed by the trial court last year, so she appealed to the Supreme Judicial Court.
GLAD, the organization Bonauto works for, shares some of the background:
Julie Gallagher and Karen Partanen were a couple for nearly 13 years. They met in Massachusetts and later moved to Florida. While living there, they bought a home and decided to have children together. When Karen was unable to become pregnant, the couple decided that Julie would be the one to give birth. With Karen’s consent and full involvement, Julie conceived two children through assisted reproduction, and they parented them together. Karen and Julie later moved back to Massachusetts and separated. Their two children are now 4 and 7.
Current Massachusetts law says that “when unmarried parents have and raise a child together in their home and hold out the child as their child to the community,” as Karen and Julie did, “then the non-birth parent is presumed to be a legal parent,” GLAD asserts. They also say state policies “favor immediate legal parentage for children born to married couples who use assisted reproduction,” and that this should apply regardless of marital status.
Last October, in a state first, a Massachusetts Probate and Family court said a nonbiological de facto mother was entitled to share custody with her ex, the child’s biological mother, even though the two were not married. (“A ‘de facto parent’ is someone other than a legal parent who, for reasons other than financial compensation, formed a child-parent relationship in which he or she shared (usually at least equally) in primary childcare responsibilities.” H/t Movement Advancement Project.)
In the current case, Karen is hoping to be named both a de facto parent, “which currently provides for rights of visitation but does not confer the full legal and familial advantages of parenthood on the children,” and a full, legal parent, “which would acknowledge her role and her responsibilities to the children.”
As I’ve said multiple times over the years, we’ve seen far too many cases in which a biological mom tries to prevent a nonbiological mom from seeing their children after separation or divorce. Let’s all agree to stop that, now. A child raised by two parents deserves to have them remain in their life, short of cases involving abuse. If nonbiological mothers are having to go to court multiple times, even in a state like Massachusetts, imagine how much harder it is in less LGBTQ-friendly states.
Massachusetts is admittedly not perfect. We still have snow in April. And we’re still fighting to pass a transgender nondiscrimination bill. But we do have Mary Bonauto. Let’s hope, for Karen and her kids, that that’s enough.
[Update, October 4, 2016: The court ruled in Partanen’s favor.]