Printer Friendly

Ripples from Obergefell.

Byline: Peter Vieth

The U.S. Supreme Court in 2015, in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges, gave full marriage rights to same-sex couples. This month, in two different courts in Virginia the Court of Appeals and a Fairfax Circuit Court jurists faced parenting issues to be decided in the wake of that decision. The appeals court ruled Feb. 13 in Hawkins v. Grese (VLW 01-7-032) that a woman who never married the biological mother did not have a custody claim to a child she helped raise for seven years. The three-judge panel held that the term parent refers only to a relationship with a child through either biology or legal adoption. Fairfax Circuit Judge Stephen C. Shannon decided Feb. in Appel v. Celia (VLW 01--011) that a child born through assisted conception to a woman in a same-sex civil union that later became a marriage is considered a child born of the parties for purposes of a divorce decree. Court of Appeals The overriding issue for the couple in Hawkins was their failure to ever tie the knot in any fashion. Denise Hawkins and Darla Grese were unmarried partners in a -year, same-sex relationship. Grese became pregnant through artificial insemination in 2007. The pair never married or formed a civil union in another state, but they raised the child together in their shared home until the relationship ended in 2014. The couple shared custody for another two years until Grese terminated her sons contact with Hawkins. Hawkins won joint custody in Virginia Beach Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court. In circuit court, however, Judge Steven C. Frucci gave full custody to Grese, despite misgivings about possible adverse effects on the child. Turning to the Court of Appeals, Hawkins alleged that Frucci erred in determining she was not a parent, that the judge violated her constitutional rights and those of the child, and that he erred in finding she had not rebutted a parental custody presumption. On behalf of Grese, Virginia Beach attorney Brandon H. Ziegler insisted the case had nothing to do with gay rights or the constitutionality of same-sex marriage. In an interview, he said his position was that Hawkins simply could not be considered a parent. Writing for the Court of Appeals panel, Judge Robert J. Humphreys first analyzed the standard for reviewing sexual orientation issues, concluding that a rational basis test applied whether the issue was a rights violation or Hawkins status as parent. Examining the use of the term parent in the Code, it is clear that the term parent contemplates a relationship to a child based upon either the contribution of genetic material through biological insemination or by means of legal adoption, Humphreys wrote. The U.S. Supreme Courts landmark recognition of same-sex marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015 did not redefine the definitions of parent or family, the court continued. Hawkins suggests that the special facts and circumstances of this case provide an avenue for carving out an exception in this admittedly exceptional case. However, were we to do so, it is clear to us that the constitutional presumption of parental fitness would begin the process of suffering a death by a thousand cuts, Humphreys wrote. He warned of a Pandoras box of unintended consequences if a legal parent-child relationship were created simply by the amount of time with a child or the strength of an emotional bond. The court found Hawkins lacked standing to assert the childs constitutional right to be raised and nurtured by Hawkins. The judges also rejected the argument that special facts and circumstances existed to rebut the presumption in favor of Grese. Ziegler Greses lawyer said Hawkins could not overcome the fact there had never been a legal union between the parties, even though they might have been able to get married in Washington or Maine before they separated. These parties were not married. They had the opportunity and they did not do so, Ziegler said. Hawkins was represented by an attorney with the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund Inc. in Atlanta and by Barbara A. Fuller of Virginia Beach. A spokesperson for the Lambda organization did not respond to a request for comment as of press time. Fairfax County Circuit In the Fairfax case, Valeria Appel and Lynne Celia entered into a civil union in Connecticut in 2006. The union was converted to a marriage under Connecticut law in 20. The relationship soured and Appel sought a no-fault divorce in Fairfax. Both women had given birth to children through assisted conception. One of the children in question was born to Celia in 200 in Virginia. The other was born to Appel in 2012. Appel submitted a proposed Final Decree of Divorce stating that there were no children born or adopted of the marriage. Celia, without counsel, appeared and contested that language. She contended the children should be acknowledged as children born of the marriage because they were born after the couple entered into a civil union. Reviewing the Code, Shannon concluded the applicable language should be born of the parties. The judge then turned to Virginias assisted conception statute, Va. Code 20-15, which provides rights to a husband of a gestational mother but fails to address the rights of a wife of a gestational mother in a same-sex marriage. Obergefell and a later U.S. Supreme Court decision made that law unconstitutional, leaving the court with a choice of either nullifying the law altogether or expanding its benefits to same-sex marriages, the judge said. Generally, the preferred judicial remedy is to extend benefits, rather than to nullify a statute, Shannon wrote. While extending the assisted conception statute to same-sex marriage would not undermine the legislative goal of preventing anonymous donors from asserting parental claims, nullifying the statute would have the opposite result, the judge reasoned. Shannon ruled that even the child born during the civil union, not during the marriage, should be considered born of the parties. He noted the term is used in Virginias no-fault divorce statute where it extends the required waiting period if there are children involved. Acknowledging the importance of minor children in the no-fault divorce statute, Shannon concluded the older child was worthy of the designation. In reaching this conclusion, the Courts ruling is a narrow one. The Court is not making a determination as to the parental rights of the parties, and the scenario is limited to a child of a gestational mother in a civil union, which later becomes a marriage by operation of law, Shannon wrote. Appel was represented by Stephanie Stinson of Manassas. She did not respond to a request for comment as of press time.

Copyright © 2018 BridgeTower Media. All Rights Reserved.
COPYRIGHT 2018 BridgeTower Media Holding Company, LLC
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2018 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:Appel v. Celia, Hawking v. Grese
Author:Vieth, Peter
Publication:Virginia Lawyers Weekly
Date:Feb 19, 2018
Words:1117
Previous Article:Va. Court of Appeals: No parent status without marriage or adoption.
Next Article:Persecution targeting family prevents removal.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters