Posted on 08/28/2002 9:36:40 AM PDT by RCW2001
COLUMBUS, Ohio Aug. 28 — The Ohio Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected a lesbian couple's claim that both women are parents of each other's children, but said a juvenile court may decide whether to grant the women's request for equal custody.
In a 5-2 decision, the court sent the case back to the Hamilton County juvenile court that first rejected the request of Teri Bonfield and Shelly Zachritz.
It said the juvenile court has jurisdiction over deciding the custody of any child who is not a ward of the court, and can therefore determine whether the request is in the children's best interest.
However, Chief Justice Thomas Moyer wrote in the majority's opinion that the women can't be considered parents of each other's children because under Ohio law, "parent" typically includes only the biological or adoptive parent.
The couple's attorney, Sallee Fry Waterman, praised the decision.
"The court is saying you don't need to be considered a parent to have shared custody of a child," Waterman said. "The decision advances a need for courts to determine what's in the children's best interest regardless of the adult's title and to recognize nontraditional families in custody decisions."
The suburban Cincinnati couple have been together 14 years.
Bonfield adopted two sons in 1996. Using artificial insemination, she gave birth to a son in 1996, and then to boy and girl twins in 1998. Zachritz later gave birth to a son by artificial insemination.
While Bonfield is the natural or adoptive mother of five of the children, the couple said, Zachritz has been the primary caregiver and the children consider her their parent.
The couple say each woman needs legal custody of the six children in case they separate or one of them dies, and sought to "confirm their commitment that they will both continue to raise the children regardless what happens to their relationship," according to court records.
A juvenile court magistrate ruled the court didn't have jurisdiction to grant the couple's request because Ohio law does not recognize same-sex parenting. An appeals court upheld the decision.
No doubt about that. But that does not make it a good thing to purposefully create fatherless families. It is a bad and selfish thing.
It's a sad thing to say to a kid: "Well, I just didn't think you deserved to have a dad." And for the sperm donor dad, it sad to say to a kid: "Well, I thought I'd bring you into this world without taking a smidgeon of responsibility for you, without ever caring about you or loving you, as a lark, for a few bucks. Your life was worth a few bucks to me."
My Dad passed away when I was 5, so I was raised by my Mom also.
This situation is completely different.
Apparently Teri is 'mom' to some of the kids and 'dad' to another. Shelly is 'mom' to one and 'dad' to the others. That isn't confusing to the kids???
These people think ( and many courts agree) that they have a 'right' to have a kid, regardless of trauma to the child.
It is selfish, no thought of the child.
Their getting pregnant wasn't and accident it was a conscious effort.
They'll finally get a dad to love and care for them all their lives long.
Laws of nature are self-enforcing.
People who are susceptible to disease shouldn't have children? That will really reduce the gene pool.
If you're lesbian, AIDS is the least of your problems.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.