Of Financial Rights of Assisted Reproductive Technology: Non-Marital Children and Back-Up Plans
Dara E. Purvis
Pennsylvania State University, Penn State Law
January 30, 2011
Southern California Law Review Postscript, Vol. 83, January 2011
Response to Courtney G. Joslin, Protecting Children(?): Marriage, Gender, and Assisted Reproductive Technology, 83 S. CAL. L. REV. 1177 (2010).
This short response argues that Joslin’s parentage rule assessing intent at conception cannot be utilized without a clearer definition of conception and that it should be expanded to assess intent at any point before birth.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 8
Keywords: Family law
Date posted: July 31, 2011
© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 0.188 seconds