Current:Home > FinanceJudges limit North Carolina child support law requirement in IVF case involving same-sex couple-Angel Dreamer Wealth Society D1 Reviews & Insights
Judges limit North Carolina child support law requirement in IVF case involving same-sex couple
View Date:2024-12-23 14:32:32
RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — Someone acting as a child’s parent can’t be ordered to pay child support in North Carolina unless the person is an actual parent or has formally agreed to provide such compensation, the state Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday in a case involving an unmarried same-sex couple.
A divided three-judge panel reversed a lower court that declared the ex-partner of the child’s mother, who gave birth in 2016 through in vitro fertilization, as a parent within the state’s child support laws. The local judge directed Tricosa Green, who didn’t give birth, to pay the biological mother about $250 per month and keep covering the child’s health insurance premiums.
The two women have had joint legal and physical custody for years. Child support law establishes that a “mother” and “father” share the primary liability for child support. In 2021, Mecklenburg County District Court Judge J. Rex Marvel wrote that it was appropriate that mother and father apply in this dispute in a “gender-neutral way,” and that “the duty of support should accompany the right to custody in cases such as this one.”
But Marvel’s order, if allowed to stand, would treat unmarried same-sex couples using IVF differently than unmarried heterosexual couples in which the male partner is not the sperm donor, Court of Appeals Judge Donna Stroud wrote in the prevailing opinion.
While state law instructs when statutes can have a gender-neutral interpretation, it doesn’t apply to the child support law, Stroud said. Green does not meet the plain definition of the child’s biological or adoptive mother and had signed no formal financial support agreement, she added.
Marvel’s attempt“ to impose one obligation of a mother or father – child support – upon (Green), to go along with the benefit of joint custody already conferred upon her is understandable,” Stroud wrote. “We fully appreciate the difficult issues created by IVF and other forms of assisted reproductive technology, but only the General Assembly has the authority to amend our statutes to address these issues.”
Green and E’Tonya Carter had a romantic relationship and participated in an IVF program in New York, selecting a sperm donor and with Green paying for the process, according to case documents.
Carter gave birth to a girl in 2016 in Michigan, where Green couldn’t be listed on the birth certificate. Their romantic relationship ended and they all moved to North Carolina. Green sought custody, leading to the joint custody agreement in 2019. Then Carter sought child support, saying that Green had acted as a parent since before the child was born.
Marvel referred to Green as the “biological mother” and Carter the “de facto mother” who had “enthusiastically and voluntarily held herself out as a parent,” attending the child’s doctor appointments and providing diapers and clothes.
Stroud wrote that someone acting in the place of a parent, like Green, may also be secondarily liable for support, but a judge can’t order support unless the person “has voluntarily assumed the obligation of support in writing.”
Judge Julee Flood joined in Stroud’s opinion. In a dissent, Judge Toby Hampson said that Marvel’s order should be upheld, citing a 1997 state Supreme Court opinion involving a unmarried heterosexual couple that he said found that a man acting like a father may acquire a duty to support a child.
Tuesday’s majority “effectively holds that — as it relates to an unwed same-sex couple— the duty of support, as a matter of law, does not accompany the right to custody in cases such as this one,” Hampson wrote.
The state Supreme Court could agree to consider an appeal of Tuesday’s 2-1 decision.
The case and Tuesday’s opinions have nothing to do with details of the IVF procedure or frozen embryos. They have received national attention since the Alabama Supreme Court ruled in February that couples whose embryos were destroyed accidentally at a storage facility could pursue wrongful death lawsuits. Alabama’s legislature has since enacted a law shielding doctors from potential legal liability for such destruction.
veryGood! (6464)
Related
- Nearly 80,000 pounds of Costco butter recalled for missing 'Contains Milk statement': FDA
- In the Outer Banks, Officials and Property Owners Battle to Keep the Ocean at Bay
- The Most Accurate Climate Models Predict Greater Warming, Study Shows
- Catholic health care's wide reach can make it hard to get birth control in many places
- My Chemical Romance will perform 'The Black Parade' in full during 2025 tour: See dates
- Viski Barware Essentials Worth Raising a Glass To: Shop Tumblers, Shakers, Bar Tools & More
- Avoiding the tap water in Jackson, Miss., has been a way of life for decades
- Fortune releases list of top 10 biggest U.S. companies
- Blake Snell free agent rumors: Best fits for two-time Cy Young winner
- Amputation in a 31,000-year-old skeleton may be a sign of prehistoric medical advances
Ranking
- NCT DREAM enters the 'DREAMSCAPE': Members on new album, its concept and songwriting
- Everything to Know About King Charles III's Coronation
- Today’s Climate: May 29-30, 2010
- As school starts, teachers add a mental-health check-in to their lesson plans
- How Leonardo DiCaprio Celebrated His 50th Birthday
- Federal Program Sends $15 Million to Help Coal Communities Adapt
- Today’s Climate: June 4, 2010
- Bama Rush Documentary Trailer Showcases Sorority Culture Like Never Before
Recommendation
-
NBC's hospital sitcom 'St. Denis Medical' might heal you with laughter: Review
-
Arctic Sea Ice Hits Record Lows Off Alaska
-
U.S. Geothermal Industry Heats Up as It Sees Most Gov’t Support in 25 Years
-
As ‘Epic Winds’ Drive California Fires, Climate Change Fuels the Risk
-
Olivia Munn Says She “Barely Knew” John Mulaney When She Got Pregnant With Their Son
-
Today’s Climate: June 1, 2010
-
Today’s Climate: May 27, 2010
-
After months, it's decided: Michiganders will vote on abortion rights in November