aasplogo.jpg (7152 bytes)      

 

Back to DP
Information

Back to news articles
about domestic
partners

DP News Archive

List of government
health plans

List of government
registries

Statistics on employer
cost for dp benefits

List of Private
Sector Plans

What's wrong with
excluding heterosexual
couples?

Home Page What's New About AASP Contact AASP
Members Join AASP Guestbook Site Map
 

Archive3.gif (2046 bytes)

 

Domestic Partnership News Archive
October 14 - October 20, 2000

 

 

 
 

This page contains news for the period October 14, 2000 through October 20, 2000.

 

 

 

 

<<   October 2000  >>

S M T W Th F S
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
08 09 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31        

October 20, 2000

Co-parent wins visitation rights in New York

A story published today by Planet Out reports that for the first time in New York state, a court on October 19 granted a lesbian co-parent permanent visitation rights with the two children her former partner bore by artificial insemination.

The biological mother known as "Christine" went immediately to file an appeal of the ruling, but Westchester County State Family Court Judge Joan Cooney refused to delay the visits pending appeal. The co-parent known as "Janis" will see the children, a four-year-old boy and a two-year-old girl, on October 21 for the first time since the couple broke up in November 1999. "I feel like I won the World Series," Janis said, weeping with joy.

Outside the courthouse, Janis told reporters, "This is an amazing victory not only for me, but for any nonbiological parent in New York. It's not about lifestyle. Times have changed and families have changed. I think the courts are being made to protect different families that have emerged."

Cooney was in large part convinced by child psychiatrist Dr. Paulina Kernberg of New York Presbyterian Hospital, who gained fame performing interviews in the Elian Gonzalez case.

After interviewing all the parties, Kernberg said, "It would be in the best interests of the children in the short and long run to have access to visits with [Janis]. Two committed parents are a source of safety and enrichment in their lives." Cooney also took to heart the testimony of the director of the nursery school where the couple had enrolled their son, letting her know "there were two mothers."

Had Janis formally adopted the children, her right to visitation would be unquestioned and she could even seek custody. New York first approved co-adoptions by gay and lesbian co-parents in 1995.

Although several other states have refused to recognize parental status of lesbians who failed to formally adopt their partners' children, the U.S. Supreme Court has recently declined to take up appeals of rulings in New Jersey and Massachusetts that granted visitation to lesbian co-parents.


Co-parent in California can sue for visitation rights

A story published today by the Advocate reports that a California appeals court has cleared the way for a lesbian who helped her partner raise their child to sue for visitation rights to see the girl now that the couple have broken up.

The woman, identified in court papers as Karen B., was granted the right in a ruling from a state appeals court made public on Wednesday.

Karen filed her lawsuit in March 1999, saying that she and her former partner, Jennifer J., who is the biological mother of the girl, helped raise daughter Olivia together. The women broke up before Olivia turned 2. The suit alleges that Jennifer told Karen she would never see the child again. Karen briefly won visitation rights but lost them when a court ruled against her.

The ruling from the state appeals court reinstates Karen’s right to seek visitation on the grounds that the custody ruling excluding Karen has been detrimental to Olivia. However, the court warned that Karen has a “heavy burden” of proof to meet in order to win visitation. “The facts may well bear out [Karen’s] contention that, from the minor’s point of view, she does indeed have ‘two mothers,’” Justice William Stein wrote in the 3–0 opinion.

“Yet only one of them is recognized under existing law, and she is entitled to preference in any decision regarding custody. Perhaps the repetition of this unfortunate scenario, in case after case…will eventually lead to a legislative solution, if for no other reason than to protect the children involved from becoming pawns in the conflict of the adults who care for them.”

 

Home Page What's New About AASP Contact AASP
Members Join AASP Guestbook Site Map