NJ & CT News

NEW JERSEY

Court Denies Wife's Bid to Be Declared Mother of Husband's Surrogate Child

New Jersey has no constitutional or legal basis for recognizing an infertile wife as the mother of her husband's child born to a surrogate, an appeals court held Feb. 22 in a ruling that harkens back to the landmark Baby M case. The court said it did not deny the “intrinsic societal worth, emotional appeal, and compelling logic” of granting parenthood to the infertile wife. But it said adoption remains the means chosen by the legislature to create that status. “Indeed, nothing in our Constitution or law provides that an adult ' male or female ' with no biological or gestational connection to a child has a fundamental right to create parentage by the most expeditious or convenient method possible,” the court held. The panel said its ruling, in Matter of the Parentage of a Child by T.J.S. and A.L.S., A-4784-09, flows directly from In re Baby M., 109 N.J. 396 (1988), which voided surrogacy-for-hire contracts and rejected an equal protection challenge to the New Jersey Parentage Act provision in question.

CONNECTICUT

Grandparent Visitation: Jurisdictional Prerequisites Cannot Be Waived

In Warner v. Bicknell,126 Conn.App. 588 (2/15/11), the Appellate Court of Connecticut recently held that a trial court erred in entertaining a grandparent visitation case in which the grandparent did not, in accordance with Roth v. Weston, 259 Conn. 202 (2002), allege a parent-like relationship with the child or that denial of visitation would cause the child real and significant harm. The case involved a paternal grandmother who sought contact with her grandchild. The mother acquiesced, entering into a temporary agreement with the grandmother and later allowing expansion of the grandmother's access through supervised visits (through the Southern Connecticut State University Family Clinic program). The parties also agreed to go to court with a report from the program. In May 2008, the court ordered a continuation of supervised visits. The grandmother next petitioned for unsupervised visits. After the mother failed to appear, the court granted the petition. The mother, who claimed she did not receive notice of the hearing at which unsupervised visits were ordered, unsuccessfully tried to get the court to reconsider. On appeal, the mother, who for the first time now had the assistance of counsel, claimed that the court should not have entertained the grandparent visitation case because the plaintiff failed to satisfy the two-part test for standing established by Connecticut's Supreme Court in Roth v. Weston. The appellate court agreed, and was not persuaded by the grandmother's argument that, since the mother had already agreed to some form of visitation and had submitted the question to the court, she could not now cry foul. In answer to this, the court stated: “The requirement of subject matter jurisdiction cannot be waived by any party and can be raised at any stage in the proceedings.”

NEW JERSEY

Court Denies Wife's Bid to Be Declared Mother of Husband's Surrogate Child

New Jersey has no constitutional or legal basis for recognizing an infertile wife as the mother of her husband's child born to a surrogate, an appeals court held Feb. 22 in a ruling that harkens back to the landmark Baby M case. The court said it did not deny the “intrinsic societal worth, emotional appeal, and compelling logic” of granting parenthood to the infertile wife. But it said adoption remains the means chosen by the legislature to create that status. “Indeed, nothing in our Constitution or law provides that an adult ' male or female ' with no biological or gestational connection to a child has a fundamental right to create parentage by the most expeditious or convenient method possible,” the court held. The panel said its ruling, in Matter of the Parentage of a Child by T.J.S. and A.L.S., A-4784-09, flows directly from In re Baby M., 109 N.J. 396 (1988), which voided surrogacy-for-hire contracts and rejected an equal protection challenge to the New Jersey Parentage Act provision in question.

CONNECTICUT

Grandparent Visitation: Jurisdictional Prerequisites Cannot Be Waived

In Warner v. Bicknell ,126 Conn.App. 588 (2/15/11), the Appellate Court of Connecticut recently held that a trial court erred in entertaining a grandparent visitation case in which the grandparent did not, in accordance with Roth v. Weston , 259 Conn. 202 (2002), allege a parent-like relationship with the child or that denial of visitation would cause the child real and significant harm. The case involved a paternal grandmother who sought contact with her grandchild. The mother acquiesced, entering into a temporary agreement with the grandmother and later allowing expansion of the grandmother's access through supervised visits (through the Southern Connecticut State University Family Clinic program). The parties also agreed to go to court with a report from the program. In May 2008, the court ordered a continuation of supervised visits. The grandmother next petitioned for unsupervised visits. After the mother failed to appear, the court granted the petition. The mother, who claimed she did not receive notice of the hearing at which unsupervised visits were ordered, unsuccessfully tried to get the court to reconsider. On appeal, the mother, who for the first time now had the assistance of counsel, claimed that the court should not have entertained the grandparent visitation case because the plaintiff failed to satisfy the two-part test for standing established by Connecticut's Supreme Court in Roth v. Weston. The appellate court agreed, and was not persuaded by the grandmother's argument that, since the mother had already agreed to some form of visitation and had submitted the question to the court, she could not now cry foul. In answer to this, the court stated: “The requirement of subject matter jurisdiction cannot be waived by any party and can be raised at any stage in the proceedings.”