I am an associate professor of law at Seattle University School of Law. You can read my faculty profile. I teach family law and law and sexuality as well as civil procedure. I’ve worked on some of the recent innovative cases about family law in Washington State. Most of my scholarship is in the area of family law, some of it covering the same topics that are in this blog. You can get copies/read it here (registration required, but free).
-
Recent Posts
Tags in use
abortion adoption altruistic surrogacy ART baby-selling binding surrogacy birth control birth parents child child support commercial surrogacy contract de facto parent DNA egg donor embryo family father fatherless feminism functional parent gay father gender genetic link genetic surrogacy globalization holding out intended parent IVF language lesbian mother marriage media mother movies natural parent number of parents parent pregnancy second-parent single-mother sperm donor step-parent surrogacy transgender-
Top Posts
Categories
Archives
Blogroll
Blog at WordPress.com. Theme: Cutline by Chris Pearson.
3 responses so far ↓
aintgotno // May 24, 2008 at 5:40 am
very interesting blog. also, i like the fossil header.
HENRY O. NAPENAS // June 25, 2008 at 1:28 am
I am so excited to find out about a ” Holding Out A Child–De Facto Parenthood for Men? ” If I knew sooner I could used this in court. I hope its not too late yet. I have a case that is very crucial to help my children be with their sibling and me as defacto parent. My children should have rights but they held against their sibling together from the father of the 2nd child.I got a big story and If i can get some help. I needed to go media. This is a big story…
Michelle // June 27, 2008 at 10:04 am
Here is bit of a ruling from a California case that utilizes the ‘holding out’ statute and applies it as gender neutral because both parents are women, and children can have two parents of the same sex. Interesting.
“The Court of Appeal reversed on a different ground, ruling that the stipulated judgment is void because “[t]he family court could not accept the parties’ stipulation as a basis for entering the judgment of parentage.” The court further ruled, however, that Lisa “may be able to establish parentage *162 under the [Uniform Parentage] Act” as a presumed parent under a gender-neutral application of Family Code section 7611, subdivision (d), which provides that a man is presumed to be a father if “[h]e receives the child into his home and openly holds out the child as his natural child.” Holding that a child could have two parents of the same sex, the court remanded the matter to the superior court “to conduct, in accordance with the views expressed herein, such further proceedings and amendment of pleadings as are appropriate in order to resolve the issues of Lisa’s parentage and her rights, if any, to visitation and/or custody.” Kristine Renee H. v. Lisa Ann R., 16 Cal.Rptr. 3d 123 (Ct. App. 2004), review granted and opinion superseded by 18 Cal.Rptr. 3d 668 (2004).
Leave a Comment