Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535 (1942).Google Scholar

See Michael H. v. Gerald D., 491 U.S. 110 (1989); Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health, 497 U.S. 261 (1990); Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992); Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702 (1997).Google Scholar

J.R., M.R. and W.K.J. v. Utah, 261 F. Supp. 2d 1268 (D. Utah 2002).Google Scholar

Davis v. Davis, 842 S.W.2d 588 (Tenn. 1992).Google Scholar

Id.; York v. Jones, 717 F. Supp. 421 (E.D.Va. 1989).Google Scholar

The persons who create the embryos with the intent to become the resulting child’s legal parents.Google Scholar

Johnson v. Calvert, 851 P.2d 776, 784, 785 (Cal. 1993).Google Scholar

Removal of an egg from a woman’s ovary and fertilization of the egg outside the womb in a Petri dish.Google Scholar

Matter of Baby M, 537 A.2d 1227 (N.J. 1988).Google Scholar

Gestational surrogacy is the process in which an ovum or ova are retrieved via in vitro fertilization from the ovaries of the intended mother or an egg donor and fertilized in a Petri dish, typically with the intended father’s sperm, to create an embryo for transfer to a gestational surrogate, who then gestates the child but is not genetically related to the child.Google Scholar

Johnson v. Calvert, 851 P.2d 776 (cert. denied 510 U.S. 874) (Cal. 1993).Google Scholar

Buzzanca v. Buzzanca, 72 Cal.Rptr.2d 280 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998).Google Scholar

Vernon’s Texas Code Annotated, Family Code, § 160.750 et seq.Google Scholar

California Family Code, § 7570 et seq.; Johnson v. Calvert, 5 Cal. 4th 84, 19 Cal. Rptr.2d 494, 851 P.2d 776 (cert. denied 510 U.S. 874, 114 S. Ct. 206, 126 L. Ed.2d 163) (Cal. 1993); Buzzanca v. Buzzanca, 61 Cal. App. 4th 1410, 72 Cal. Rptr. 2d 280 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998).Google Scholar

Minnesota Statutes Annotated, Chapter 257.Google Scholar

Based on an anecdotal study of surrogacies as referenced in 2002 of an estimated 14,000 to 16,000 reported surrogate births through that date, only 88 had resulted in any dispute between the surrogate and the intended parents, most of which never reached the courts. Debra Morgenstern Katz, Why more and more infertile women are turning to others to bear their babies. Parenting Magazine December–January 2002; 88. Of those 88, only 23 were surrogates who threatened to keep the baby (usually to leverage some contractual benefit to themselves, not because they really wanted the child), and 65 were parents who did not want the resulting children (because of divorce, bankruptcy, health condition, number, etc.). If true, this evidences an uncontested success rate of greater than 99.5 percent. The cases that are contested in court get the most publicity, but they are definitely in the very vast minority. This conforms to my professional experience as well, in which I have handled over 300 surrogacy parentage proceedings without any disputes over parentage.Google Scholar

In D.P. v. T.R., F-04079-10 (2010), a New York State court upheld a California prebirth order and judgment of paternity for twins conceived through gestational surrogacy. The court ruled that the US Constitution’s Full Faith and Credit Clause trumps New York’s public policy barring surrogacy. In fact, the court stated that both federal and state law hold that a state’s policy is not a valid basis to deny full faith and credit to another state’s properly adjudicated judgment. In the case at hand, a gay couple had twins through gestational surrogacy in California and obtained a prebirth order of dual paternity in 2001. In 2010, the couple became involved in a child support proceeding where one of the men sought to escape support obligations by challenging the validity of the California parentage ruling in light of the New York state antisurrogacy policy.  As noted by attorney Steven J. Weissman, “This decision gives a good deal of surety, especially to the non-biological father, that his parentage cannot later be challenged because of New York’s public policy against surrogacy.”Google Scholar

Culliton v. Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 435 Mass. 285 (2001); and Hodas v. Morin, 442 Mass. 544 (2004).Google Scholar

Johnson v. Calvert, 851 P.2d 776 (cert. denied 510 U.S. 874) (Cal. 1993); and Buzzanca v. Buzzanca, 61 Cal. App. 4th 1410, 72 Cal. Rptr. 2d 280 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998).Google Scholar

Belsito v. Clark, 644 N.E. 2d 760 (1994); and J.F. v. D.B., 879 N.E. 2d 740 (2007).Google Scholar

Arredondo v. Nodelman, 622 N.Y. S. 2d 181 (1994).Google Scholar

Article IV, Section 1, of the U.S. Constitution.Google Scholar

28 USCA, § 1738.Google Scholar

Milwaukee County v. M. E. White Co., 296 U.S. 268, 56 S. Ct. 229, 80 L. Ed. 220 (1935).Google Scholar

D.P. v. T.R., F-04079-10.Google Scholar