Tag Archive for: assisted reproduction

Surrogacy Contracts

Surrogacy is the process whereby a third party is used to assist couples in having a child. Surrogacy may be traditional wherein the third party will have a biological tie to the child but has agreed to relinquish any legal rights as a parent. The other option is gestational surrogacy where the third party is just a carrier and the egg and sperm of the intended parents are implanted in the surrogate. Pennsylvania does not have a statute in place as it relates to surrogacy, however, case law has established courts are willing to uphold the provisions of a surrogacy contract. In J.F. v. D.B., the carrier mother attempted to keep the children following birth despite having entered a surrogacy agreement. 897 A.2d 1261 (2006). The court eventually held she didn’t have standing for a custody action and turned the children over to the intended parents per the contract.

Another case which upheld a surrogacy agreement is In re Baby S, 2015 Pa. Super. 244 (2015).

In re Baby S, involved celebrity couple Sherri Shepherd and former husband, Lamar Sally. The couple had entered into a surrogacy contract to assist in having a child. Several months into the pregnancy, Shepherd refused to sign additional forms to have her listed on the birth certificate as the intended parent of the child because of the pending dissolution of her marriage to Sally. Sally ended up taking care of the child and subsequently sought support from Shepherd. The court ruled that Shepherd was an intended parent evidenced by the signed surrogacy contract and accordingly, ordered her to meet her child support obligation. Accordingly, parties who intend to use a surrogate should consult with an attorney first and draft a clear, unambiguous agreement.

You may also need a pre-birth Order to ensure the names of the intended parents can be listed on the birth certificate at the time of birth.

by

Surrogacy

Surrogacy is the process whereby a third party is used to assist couples in having a child. Surrogacy may be traditional wherein the third party will have a biological tie to the child however has agreed to relinquish any legal rights as a parent. The other option is gestational surrogacy where the third party is just a carrier and the egg and sperm of the intended parents are implanted in the surrogate. Pennsylvania does not have a statute in place as it relates to surrogacy, however, case law has upheld a surrogacy contract. In J.F. v. D.B., the carrier mother attempted to keep the children following birth despite having entered a surrogacy agreement. 897 A.2d 1261 (2006). The court eventually held she didn’t have standing for a custody action and turned the children over to the intended parents per the contract. The courts went a step further in In re Baby S, when it explicitly upheld a surrogacy agreement. 2015 Pa. Super. 244 (2015).

In re Baby S, involved celebrity couple Sherri Shepherd and former husband, Lamar Sally. The couple had entered into a surrogacy contract to assist in having a child. Several months into the pregnancy, Shepherd refused to sign additional forms to have her listed on the birth certificate as the intended parent of the child because of the pending dissolution of her marriage to Sally. Sally ended up taking care of the child and subsequently sought support from Shepherd. The court ruled that Shepherd was an intended parent evidenced by the signed surrogacy contract and accordingly, ordered her to meet her child support obligation. Accordingly, parties who intend to use a surrogate should consult with an attorney first and draft a clear, unambiguous agreement.

Click here to read more about family law issues.

by

Donor Agreements

Donor agreements are vital for identifying the legal rights of parties considering artificial insemination as part of assisted reproduction. An agreement should indicate that the donor does not have any rights subsequent to the donation. Specifically, the agreement should explain that no parental relationship is intended for the donor. It should be clear that donor’s parental rights are terminated and that the donor forever forfeits the ability to file for any type of custody or visitation if a child is subsequently born. The agreement would allow the recipient to dictate what happens with the donation or any embryos created using the donation.

Similarly, the party receiving the donation should waive the ability to file for any support from the donor. The agreement should also direct that the donor’s name not be on the birth certificate or any other legal document concerning parentage of the child. In the event of a known donor, you may also want to spell out if the child will ever be introduced to the donor. If this is a possibility, you may want to ask that contact information be kept up-to-date. The more likely scenario, however, is the use of an anonymous sperm donor. Regardless of the identity of the donor, best practice is to make sure a clear written agreement is in place to protect everyone’s respective interests.

Click here to read more about family law issues.

by

Assisted Reproduction

Assisted reproduction refers to a number of procedures that may be utilized to achieve pregnancy including fertility treatments, in vitro fertilization and surrogacy. In vitro fertilization entails removing a woman’s eggs from her body and implanting the eggs with sperm to create an embryo. Those embryos can be stored until ready for use. However, couples should be aware of what happens to the embryos if they subsequently separate prior to using them. In Pennsylvania, frozen embryos are considered marital property and hence, subject to division in a divorce. The Pennsylvania Superior Court stated its position on the marital status of frozen pre-embryos in Reber v. Reiss, 2012 PA Super 86. In Reber, Wife wanted to use the frozen pre-embryos in order to have children of her own whereas Husband wanted the frozen pre-embryos either destroyed or donated for research.

Prior to reaching its decision, the Pennsylvania Superior Court considered how other states have dealt with this issue. Some states have focused on whether there is a prior agreement between the parties concerning disposition of the pre-embyros in the event of divorce and if so, will uphold the agreement as enforceable. Other states have held the enforcing such an agreement is a violation of public policy and have declined to do so. Another approach is a mutual consent model requiring both parties to agree on disposition, however, Pennsylvania did not find this model feasible since parties would not be in court in the first place if they could agree. The approach that was ultimately adopted in PA calls for the court to balance the interests of the parties.


In Reber, the court found that Wife’s interest in procreation using the frozen pre-embyros outweighed Husband’s interest against procreation since evidence established that the pre-embryos were likely Wife’s only opportunity to procreate along with testimony that Wife would allow Husband to be involved and wouldn’t pursue support in response to the concerns raised by Husband. The court did acknowledge that the party against procreation should normally prevail in a balancing test, however, due to the unique facts of the case, the scales tipped in Wife’s favor. It also seems that the court would’ve likely enforced an agreement on the issue if there had been one. Accordingly, parties who intend to undergo in vitro fertilization should draft a clear, unambiguous agreement as to the disposition of embryos upon separation, divorce or death, or else be subject to a balancing approach by the court.

Click here to read more about division of marital property.

by