A groundbreaking decision by a Pennsylvania court could establish a significant precedent for child custody cases involving LGBTQ+ couples who separate or divorce.
Nicole Junior and Chanel Glover undertook the entire IVF process together, sharing the substantial expenses to assist Glover in conceiving, jointly signing contracts, and affirming Junior as the intended co-parent, as reported by the Philadelphia Inquirer. They were also in the process of finalizing paperwork for Junior to pursue a second-parent adoption.
However, their relationship hit a rough patch when Glover was halfway through the pregnancy. Following Junior’s relocation, Glover expressed her desire to raise the child as a single parent, denying Junior any involvement with the baby.
Stay Updated
Don’t miss out on the latest LGBTQ+ political news and insights – subscribe to our daily newsletter.
Nonetheless, the court ruled against Glover’s unilateral decision.
Junior filed a petition to be legally recognized as the child’s parent, and the judge concurred, acknowledging her rights as they had both actively participated in the child’s conception.
Despite Glover’s allegations of emotional abuse and erratic behavior against Junior, the judge emphasized that such accusations did not impact parental rights and could be addressed in a separate custody hearing.
Glover contested the judge’s ruling just before the baby’s birth. In August 2023, a panel of nine judges at the Pennsylvania Superior Court unanimously affirmed Junior’s full co-parental rights based on the concept of “intent-based parentage.”
The ruling stated, “The couple not only demonstrated their shared intent to conceive and raise the child but also collaborated in the process of bringing a new life into the world.”
This decision has been hailed as a triumph by LGBTQ+ advocates, commending the court for recognizing factors beyond marriage and biological ties in determining parenthood, especially given the increasing use of assisted reproductive technologies within the LGBTQ+ community.
Helen Casale, a member of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, highlighted that the state now has a precedent for judges to consider the decisions and actions leading to a child’s birth.
Casale elaborated, “What steps did they take to plan this family together? Did they attend medical appointments together? Did they jointly make decisions regarding the sperm donor?”
Attorney Mark A. Momjian characterized the lawsuit as a “multi-generational legal battle aimed at affirming civil rights within the LGBTQ community.”
Glover is currently seeking to escalate the case to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. As per the Inquirer, she argued that financial contributions to the IVF process should not solely determine intent, suggesting that her mother could also lay claim to parental rights based on that premise.
Glover stated, “My mother was present at most of my medical appointments and my son’s pediatrician visits. My mother has been more involved.”
Meanwhile, Junior has been fervently striving to be a part of her child’s life, yet she has not had the opportunity to meet her son or even catch a glimpse of him since his birth.