Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1090712
 
 

Footnotes (352)



 


 



The Case for the Genetic Parent: Stanley, Quilloin, Caban, Lehr, and Michael H. Revisited


Anthony Miller


Pepperdine University - School of Law


Loyola Law Review, New Orleans, Vol. 53, No. 395, 2007
Pepperdine University Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2008/8

Abstract:     
Does a genetic parent have right to exercise the fundamental rights which the United States Constitution affords parents? If a lesbian couple has a child with one woman donating the ova, which is artificially inseminated and implanted in the other woman, is the donor woman a mother under the Constitution? If sometime in the future a heterosexual couple has a child through the process if in vitro fertilization and through the use of an artificial womb, would the woman and man be the child's mother and father for constitutional purposes? While the United States Supreme Court has recognized that parents have many fundamental rights regarding their relationship with their children, the Court has never fully explored the issue of who qualifies as a child's parent for constitutional purposes. The Court has explored this subject only in regard to the rights of unwed fathers. Four cases, Stanley v. Illinois, Quilloin v. Woolcott, Caban v. Mohamed, and Lehr v. Robertson established that a genetic father who has participated in his child's upbringing both psychologically and financially, even though he was not married to the child's mother, should be afforded parental rights. This rule, however, was rejected by the plurality opinion of Michael H. v. Gerald D. with the result that the four unwed father cases are often thought to be overruled. Not only are these cases still viable, but they also have greater applicability today simply because modern reproductive technology has created situations where they apply not only to men who are not unwed fathers but also to many women who have children using new technology. The rule of Stanley v. Illinois, Quilloin v. Woolcott, Caban v. Mohamed, and Lehr v. Robertson should be revisited and applied to all genetic parents who have participated in their child's life, especially to women who are genetic parents but who have not given birth to their genetic children.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 77

Keywords: parent, child, fundamental rights, constitutional rights, genetic

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: February 11, 2008  

Suggested Citation

Miller, Anthony, The Case for the Genetic Parent: Stanley, Quilloin, Caban, Lehr, and Michael H. Revisited. Loyola Law Review, New Orleans, Vol. 53, No. 395, 2007; Pepperdine University Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2008/8. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1090712

Contact Information

Anthony Miller (Contact Author)
Pepperdine University - School of Law ( email )
24255 Pacific Coast Highway
Malibu, CA 90263
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 476
Downloads: 62
Download Rank: 201,649
Footnotes:  352

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo4 in 1.031 seconds