Court battle over baby girl

[El Cid]

A baby girl should be removed from her mother and live with her father and his boyfriend instead, a judge has ruled. The judgement follows a legal fight over the nature of the parents' agreement when the child was conceived.

 

The woman said they had agreed for her to be the main parent, but the father, who donated sperm, said she had agreed to be the gay couple's surrogate.

 

Should a parent be able to sign away her child, and it be legally binding? I dont think so.

When many fathers go to court for access, they rarely gain even equal rights and equal custody.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32603514

[Chelle-82]

A baby girl should be removed from her mother and live with her father and his boyfriend instead, a judge has ruled. The judgement follows a legal fight over the nature of the parents' agreement when the child was conceived.

 

The woman said they had agreed for her to be the main parent, but the father, who donated sperm, said she had agreed to be the gay couple's surrogate.

 

Should a parent be able to sign away her child, and it be legally binding? I dont think so.

When many fathers go to court for access, they rarely gain even equal rights and equal custody.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32603514

 

Well it depends. If she agreed that she was supposed to be the surrogate mother for the gay couple then yes.

 

If it wasn't agreed then no.

 

Children should never be taken away from their biological mother unless she is deemed unfit by professionals to take care of the child or she agreed to be a surrogate.

 

But I do believe if a couple, gay or not, use a surrogate mother then a contract should be made and signed before the surrogate conceives.

[sgtkate]

Having just gone through all the legal paperwork required for IVF with donors I can tell you it's exhaustitive. There's questions about the intent of the embryo, who the parents would be on the birth certificate, what would happen to the embryos in anyones death etc. There can be no 'debate' about the intentions if HFEA regulations have been followed. However, these are fairly new 2011 I believe they changed to allow same sex co-parenting registration and this would be one of the first court cases to make case law, hence the only reason why this likely even got to a court. The HFEA is legally binding so my donor could NEVER make a legal claim over any child I may have.

[aliceBB]

This particular child was given to the father and his partner because - for various reasons - the judge ruled that the mother was not the best person to bring her up.

 

Normally in surrogacy cases, the woman who gives birth to the child has the legal right to keep it regardless of what she may or may not have agreed with the sperm donor.

[El Cid]

This particular child was given to the father and his partner because - for various reasons - the judge ruled that the mother was not the best person to bring her up.

 

 

In most divorce cases the child stays with the mother, no matter who is the best parent; sometimes the father might be considered for a 50/50 split.

[Cyclone]

A baby girl should be removed from her mother and live with her father and his boyfriend instead, a judge has ruled. The judgement follows a legal fight over the nature of the parents' agreement when the child was conceived.

 

The woman said they had agreed for her to be the main parent, but the father, who donated sperm, said she had agreed to be the gay couple's surrogate.

 

Should a parent be able to sign away her child, and it be legally binding? I dont think so.

When many fathers go to court for access, they rarely gain even equal rights and equal custody.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32603514

 

The key to the judgement was that the judge determined she would have a better life if she was with the father than with the mother (who sounds like a bit of a nutcase).

The surrogacy agreement was just a part of the case.

 

---------- Post added 07-05-2015 at 07:34 ----------

 

Having just gone through all the legal paperwork required for IVF with donors I can tell you it's exhaustitive. There's questions about the intent of the embryo, who the parents would be on the birth certificate, what would happen to the embryos in anyones death etc. There can be no 'debate' about the intentions if HFEA regulations have been followed. However, these are fairly new 2011 I believe they changed to allow same sex co-parenting registration and this would be one of the first court cases to make case law, hence the only reason why this likely even got to a court. The HFEA is legally binding so my donor could NEVER make a legal claim over any child I may have.

 

It was an informal arrangement.

 

Although the judge said in his summing up that it was clear that the agreement existed and that she had lied to the court (about multiple things including that agreement).

 

---------- Post added 07-05-2015 at 07:35 ----------

 

In most divorce cases the child stays with the mother, no matter who is the best parent; sometimes the father might be considered for a 50/50 split.

 

So perhaps it's slowly moving in the right direction.