Same-sex couple seeks
parental recognition
ISSUE: Parents
want their names on the birth certificate
STATUS:
Superior Court judge delays a decision Thursday
BY KAREN SUDOL,
APP.COM from the Web, February 10, 2006
FREEHOLD, NJ -- The birth
certificate for Catherine O'Conor's and Stephanie A. DiVita's newborn son lists
no parents.
"It lists nothing because we refused to fill it out," said DiVita before a court
hearing Thursday morning to determine whether the Highlands lesbian couple can
list both their names as parents of the child, born Tuesday and conceived
through artificial insemination.
Superior Court Judge Ronald L. Reisner delayed a decision on the issue Thursday
to hear more arguments about the potential harm the couple and the boy could
face while pursuing an adoption.
Having both names on the birth certificate would guarantee 33-year-old O'Conor,
the birth mother, and 32-year-old DiVita full parental rights immediately, the
couple has argued. It is the first such birth-certificate challenge in
Monmouth County.
But the state Attorney General's Office has argued adoption is the remedy to
establish DiVita's parental rights.
While the couple is pursuing an adoption, their lawyer, Robin T. Wernik,
maintains it is a costly and lengthy process — taking between six and nine
months. The boy could be irreparably harmed during that time by not having
all of the legal rights and benefits of both parents, Wernik said.
For example, she said, if O'Conor died while DiVita was seeking adoption, DiVita
would have no rights to the child.
Reisner questioned why the matter couldn't be resolved by simply making the
adoption judgment effective from the boy's date of birth. He scheduled a
March 3 hearing to further discuss the issue.
DiVita, who attended Thursday's hearing, said later she was disappointed with
the postponement.
"It puts our life on hold and it's another reason to put our family on hold,"
she said. "It prohibits the child from having the rights and protection of
two parents."
Wernik has contended that the state's artificial insemination statute — which
grants parental rights to a husband who consents to his wife's artificial
insemination by another man — should be extended to same-sex partners. Not
doing so violates the couple's state constitutional rights, according to the
suit.
In May, a judge in Essex County granted a lesbian couple the right to have both
names listed on the birth certificate as parents of a baby girl, determining the
state had failed to show why same-sex domestic partners shouldn't be permitted
under the artificial insemination statute. The decision was the first of
its kind in New Jersey.
Wernik also argued that the state permits adoption by same-sex parents; the
artificial insemination statute should be viewed the same way.
Reisner also asked Deputy Attorney General Rachana R. Munshi why same-sex
partners shouldn't be permitted under the artificial insemination statute.
The Attorney General's Office maintains that the reference to paternity in the
artificial insemination statute doesn't extend to domestic partners. And
it is up to the Legislature to decide whether to include domestic partners in
the statute, it says.
O'Conor and DiVita registered as domestic partners in Manhattan in September
2002, which is recognized by New Jersey.
|
