California law has long provided important protections for many LGBTQ parents, but many parents and their children were still excluded from protections. California adopted key portions of the Uniform Parentage Act of 2017, particularly those provisions protecting low-income families in AB 2684 (2018). Some provisions of this law went into effect in 2019. On January 1, 2020, provisions went into effect allowing parents of children using assisted reproduction to obtain a free document protecting their parental rights at any hospital after giving birth called a Voluntary Declaration of Parentage, and requiring gamete banks and clinics to allow gamete donors a process to agree to have their identity released to children conceived with their gametes at age 18.

The Uniform Parentage Act (UPA) is a uniform law that states may enact. There have been several versions of the UPA, but until 2017, it used gendered language and did not address same-sex parents directly. The UPA of 2017 fully protects both married and unmarried same-sex couples, and includes many important provisions protecting LGBTQ parents, including provisions addressing children with multiple parents, parents using at-home insemination, surrogacy, and comprehensive assisted reproduction protections. It also provides protections for low-income parents, including protections for parents using at-home insemination, and access to a free system to establish parental rights available at every hospital in states that adopt the UPA.

NCLR participated in the drafting committee for the UPA of 2017 as an Observer, advocating for full protections for LGBTQ parents, including low-income parents.

As of March 2022, the UPA of 2017 has been enacted in California, Connecticut, Maine, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington, and legislation is pending in Hawaii, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania.

Beginning February 15, 2021, NY will allow parents to conceive children using surrogacy while protecting the rigthts of people acting as surrogates and provide important new protections to parents conceiving through assisted reproduction. Prior to this legislation, New York state had few laws protecting LGBTQ parents. In particular, NY made surrogacy illegal, and unmarried parents could have children through assisted reproductions and be recognized unless they did an adoption. The Child-Parent Security Act modernizes New York parenting laws by recognizing that sperm and egg donors are not parents; recognizing that intended parents using assisted reproduction are parents, including single parents and unmarried couples; allowing intended parents to become parents through surrogacy and recognizing that persons acting as surrogates are not parents. The law also provides some of the strongest protections for the rights of people acting as surrogates in the country. Finally, the law also allows intended parents using assisted reproduction to obtain documentation proving they are a parent for free by filling out forms available at every hospital by expanding the Acknowledgement of Paternity process, which is currently only open to unmarried genetic fathers.

NCLR is proud to have participated heavily in drafting portions of the legislation and advocating in particular for stronger protections for low-income parents, unmarried and single parents, and persons acting as surrogates. NCLR is a member of the Modern Families Coalition advancing the bill.

Andrew and Elad Dvash-Banks are a married same-sex couple who had twins through surrogacy in Canada, where they live. Each of them is the genetic father of one of the twins, but both fathers are legally-recognized as parents of the twins. Elad is an Israeli citizen and Andrew is a U.S. and Canadian dual citizen. The U.S. Consulate refused to recognize both twins as U.S. citizens because one child is not genetically tied to Andrew.

Jane Doe is the mother of three children in a rural community in the Midwest. From a young age, Jane’s middle child expressed that they may be transgender. Jane started using a new name for her child and bought the child clothes that were more consistent with the child’s gender identity. The local child-protective services agency, however, believed that Jane’s conduct constituted abuse and neglect and removed the children from Jane’s home.

Paul E. and Courtney F. disagreed about the appropriate response to their child’s gender dysphoria. After a week-long trial, the judge issued an opinion awarding primary custody to the father, but also ordering that the child’s then-current therapist continue treating the child. The court also appointed an expert in the mental health of transgender children to advise the parties and the court about ongoing treatment. The father appealed, claiming that the trial judge did not have the authority to make those decisions.

C.W. and M.N. were a married same-sex couple who decided to conceive a child using an anonymous sperm donor. Unfortunately, the couple separated during the pregnancy, but C.W. was present when their baby, A.E. was born, and was involved in A.E.’s care and support until M.N. stopped allowing her to see the baby. Even though Texas recognizes that different-sex spouses who conceive using a sperm donor are parents, the court refused to recognize C.W. as a parent.

Kathleen and Kate were a same-sex couple who conceived a child together through assisted reproduction. Kate gave birth to their child, who they raised together until the couple broke up when then child was almost three years old. Because Kate and Kathleen were unmarried and Kathleen did not adopt their child, Kathleen sought visitation as a so-called “third party” under Missouri law.

Rhonda Bombard and Sandra Torrez were a same-sex couple who had two children through assisted reproduction. Rhonda gave birth to the children, and the couple raised their children together for seven years. Rhonda then secretly moved the children to New York and cut off contact with Sandra. An Arizona trial court ordered that Sandra be given visitation with the child, but Rhonda refused to follow the order and appealed.