LGBTQ+ parental rights win in landmark court ruling

A landmark ruling by a Pennsylvania court could set an important precedent for child custody decisions for LGBTQ+ couples who separate or divorce.

According to the paper's report, Nicole Jr. and Chanel Glover went through the entire IVF process together, split the huge cost of helping Glover get pregnant, and signed a joint contract to make Junior a co-parent. It is said that he has established a position as philadelphia inquirer. They were also working on the paperwork for Junior to be adopted a second time.

Related:

But halfway through Glover's pregnancy, the couple experienced problems in their marriage. When her junior left home, Grover declared that she wanted to be a single mother and that she would not allow her junior any contact with her baby.

never miss a beat

Stay up to date with the latest LGBTQ+ politics news and insights by subscribing to our daily newsletter.

But the court ruled Glover didn't have the right to make that decision.

Junior petitioned to be recognized as the baby's parent, and the judge found that because the couple participated together in the baby's conception, she was entitled to be recognized as a parent.

Glover accused Junior of emotional abuse and erratic behavior, which Junior denied. The judge said the abuse accusations also had no bearing on parental rights and could be discussed at a future custody hearing.

Grover appealed the judge's decision just before the baby was born, and in August 2023, a nine-judge panel of the Pennsylvania Superior Court unanimously ruled that Junior should be granted the couple's “intended parentage.” The court ruled that full joint custody would be granted based on the “relationship.''

The judgment declared that “the couple not only proved their mutual intention to conceive and raise a child, but also jointly participated in the process of creating a new life.”

The ruling is seen as a victory for LGBTQ+ advocates, especially as the number of LGBTQ+ people using assisted reproduction continues to grow, moving beyond marriage and genetic ties to determine what makes a person a parent. The court praised the idea.

said Helen Casale, a fellow at the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers. Questioner The state currently has precedent for judges to consider decisions and actions that lead to the birth of a child.

“How did they come to the decision to plan this family together?” Casal explained. “Did they go to see a doctor? Did they make a decision related to the type of person who would be the sperm donor?”

Attorney Mark A. Momjian called the case “a multigenerational legal battle to affirm civil rights for the LGBTQ community.”

Glover is now trying to take the case to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.according to Mr. Questioner, She said that just someone contributing money to the IVF process is not enough to show intent, and if that were the case, her mother could also claim custody.

“My mother was present at most of my doctor's visits and most of my son's pediatric visits. She went above and beyond,” Glover said.

However, Junior has tried very hard to be a part of this child's life. She has not yet met her son since he was born and has not even seen a photo of her son.