 |
|
|
|
Surrogacy / Surrogate, Egg Donation, Embryo Donation, Sperm Donation Attorneys: Skilled, Confidential Help from National Network of Experienced Lawyers
Posted on: April 14th, 2011 by michelle
A class action lawsuit has been filed against American Society For Reproductive Medicine (“ASRM”), Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (“SART”) and Pacific Fertility Center (collectively “Defendants”) in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (styled Lindsay Kamakahi v. American Society For Reproductive Medicine, Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology and Pacific Fertility Center, Civil Action Case No. 11-Cv-1781) challenging, as allegedly per se illegal under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, an alleged horizontal price fixing agreement among purchasers of human egg donor services (“Donor Services”) in connection with ASRM’s alleged promulgation of certain rules setting forth the maximum compensation its members should pay for donor services (“Maximum Price Rules”), SART’s alleged adoption of such Maximum Price Rules and SART-member fertility clinics’ alleged agreement to follow such rules, according to the Human Egg Donor Services antitrust class action lawsuit complaint.
http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/04/13/Ova.pdf
Posted on: October 29th, 2010 by admin
National Fertility Law Center’s Of Counsel firm, Brady Klein Weissman, won a significant ruling in a full faith and credit case last month. In D.P. v. T.R., F-04079-10, a New York State court upheld a California pre-birth order and judgment of paternity for twins conceived through gestational surrogacy.
The court ruled that the U.S. Constitution’s full faith and credit clause trumps New York’s public policy barring surrogacy. In fact, the court stated that both federal and state law hold that a state’s policy is not a valid basis to deny full faith and credit to another state’s properly adjudicated judgment.
In the case at hand, a gay couple had twins through gestational surrogacy in California, and obtained a pre-birth order of paternity in 2001. In 2010, the couple became involved in a child support proceeding where one of the men sought to escape support obligations by challenging the validity of the California parentage ruling in light of the New York state anti-surrogacy policy. As noted by NFLC Of Counsel attorney Steven J. Weissman, “This decision gives a good deal of surety, especially to the non-biological father, that his parentage cannot later be challenged because of New York’s public policy against surrogacy.”
Posted on: September 22nd, 2010 by admin
Same Sex Adoption in Florida
A Miami appeals court ruled Wednesday that Florida’s ban on gays adopting is unconstitutional and affirmed the controversial adoption of two foster children by a gay North Miami couple. The unanimous 3-0 decision deals a critical blow to Florida’s 33-year-old law banning adoption by gay men and lesbians, and most likely sends the case to Florida’s highest court for resolution.
Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/09/22/1836756/appeal-court-florida-ban-on-gay.html#ixzz10HtHb5UL
Posted on: August 5th, 2010 by admin
The “State” of Affairs in Same Sex Marriage Laws
Yesterday, a federal district court declared that Proposition 8 – which denied same sex couples the right to marriage (in California) – violates the equal protection and due process clauses of the United States Constitution. It is expected that the case will be appealed – first to a three-judge panel of the 9th Cir. Court of Appeals and then to the U.S. Supreme Court (with some additional back and forth likely in between). The district court’s ruling, however, sets the stage for a landmark decision which could make same sex marriage legal across the entire United States if the ruling is upheld.
As of today, ten countries allow same-sex couples to marry: Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Iceland, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain and Sweden). Lesbian and gay couples also can marry in Mexico City the most populous city in North America.
In the United States, the following six jurisdictions allow same-sex couples to marry: Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont.
The California Supreme Court held in May 2009 that the estimated 18,000 couples who married in California between that court’s marriage equality decision in May 2008 and Prop 8’s passage on November 4, 2008 remain validly married under California law. At least Maryland and New York honor married same-sex couples’ marital status from other states. At least California and New Jersey treat married same-sex couples as entitled to all state law rights and responsibilities through state domestic partnership or civil union rules.
Posted on: July 21st, 2010 by admin
Wisconsin Supreme Court Says Insurance Company Cannot Exclude Surrogacy Coverage
The Wisconsin Supreme Court has issued a decision in a case that we previously reported on in September 2009. The court held that an insurer may not deny maternity coverage for surrogates “based solely on the insured’s reasons for becoming pregnant or the method used to achieve pregnancy.”
The effect of this decision is that insurance policies in Wisconsin which provide maternity coverage may not exclude coverage for surrogates or gestational carriers, regardless of the wording of the policy.
Click here for a link to the court’s full decision:
http://www.wicourts.gov/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=52286
Posted on: July 10th, 2010 by admin
Protect Your Parental Rights With Family Planning Documents
Intended parents forming a family through surrogacy face many medical, legal, and family law issues that go beyond the basic surrogacy agreement and the initial family formation, such as:
- Who will act as the legal guardian of your child(ren) in the event you are unable to act due to death, or temporary or permanent disability, prior to the time a parental order is obtained?
- Who is authorized to make medical decisions with respect to your child(ren) in the event of your disability or death?
- Who is authorized to make vital medical decisions for you if you are unable to make those decisions for yourself?
- Who is authorized to make decisions with respect to your other legal and financial matters in the event you become temporarily or permanently disabled, including decisions relevant to the surrogacy and birth process?
Family Planning Documents are drafted to clarify your intentions as to who has authority to make these important decisions regarding your and your child(ren)’s health, medical care, and guardianship in the event of your death or incapacity.
Recognizing that our clients find themselves in multiple states both during the course of, and subsequent to, their family creation process RLC’s Family Planning Documents cover these family-medical-legal issues in a multi-jurisdictional manner drafted with the intent that they be effective in as many states as possible.
These documents include:
Guardianship Designation, Power of Attorney and Consent Signed by Your Surrogate
Your Surrogacy Agreement is an important legal document; however, its main purpose is to document your arrangement with the surrogate and the parties’ intentions. And while your parental rights are established with a court judgment, even if it is a pre-birth order it does not become effective until the birth of your child(ren). A Surrogate Guardianship Designation will help to protect your parental rights before and after the birth of your child(ren), providing you with authority to make medical and other decisions regarding your child(ren) until the court orders of parentage become effective. Therefore, we strongly recommend protecting your parental rights through this formal guardianship document; and it is ideally executed at about the same time as your surrogacy contract.
Your Formal Guardianship Designation
Many parents often consider who will be responsible for taking care of their child(ren) if they were to die or become incapacitated. Unfortunately, many parents do not find the time to ensure that this decision is made legally binding. Nomination of Guardian and Nomination of Standby Guardian documents officially name your choice of alternate/backup guardian(s) of the child(ren), while in utero and once born, in the event that you are unable to be there to care for your child(ren). These documents are accompanied by stand-alone consent forms authorizing another intended parent or a third person to consent to medical treatment for the child(ren). This group of documents is particularly important for families where only one intended parent will be listed on the birth certificate.
Advance Healthcare Directives/Proxies
Advanced healthcare directives establish your rights to have a particular person make healthcare decisions for you if you are unable to do so for yourself.
General Durable Powers of Attorney
Power of Attorney documents establish the right of your designated person to administer your assets and make legal and financial decisions on your behalf (including with respect to the surrogacy) in the event you are unable to do so for yourself.
Your Family Planning Documents can also:
- Supplement your will or living trust and insure that appropriate legal appointments and expressions of intent are in place prior to the execution of a will or living trust (which are more complex and often require substantial time to develop in conjunction with an overall estate plan);
- Save you time and money, since many of the Family Planning Documents would ordinarily be part of the suite of documents that you would prepare in connection with a will or living trust.
RLC’s Family Planning Documents are applicable to all Intended Parents, whether single, married, or in a domestic partnership or civil union.
For more information, please call RLC at 888-259-6000 and to speak with one of our attorneys, or email us at info@rlcsd.com.
Posted on: June 16th, 2010 by admin
Surrogacy Issues for Non-U.S. Intended Parents
Click here for three 5 minute online interviews with National Fertility Law Expert, Richard Vaughn.
http://www.globalivf.com/expert-interviews.php
Posted on: May 11th, 2010 by admin
Radio Interview / Q&A – Family Building Options for the LGBT Community
CreatingAFamily.org interviews Willard Halm of the National Fertility Law Center.
Will specializes exclusively in assisted reproduction and family formation law, and he and his partner are the parents of 3 children from egg donation and surrogacy.
Adoption options are also discussed, with questions in this area answered by attorney Barbara Casey.
The full radio interview may be heard by clicking on: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/creatingafamily/2010/05/05/family-building-options-for-the-lgbt-community.
If you have additional questions about family building through assisted reproduction for the LGBT community, please contact National Fertility Law Center at 1-800-558-4009 (or 1-619-464-6640 if you are dialing from outside the U.S.), and ask to speak to one of our attorneys.
Posted on: April 12th, 2010 by admin
Spring 2010 ART Legislative Update
Assisted Reproduction Legislative Update
By Richard B. Vaughn, Esq.
National Fertility Law Center
2010 Copyright
As consumers of fertility medical, legal and information services, you may already know that there is not a lot of legislation or regulation in this area. However, there are actually quite a few legislative proposals being debated all across the country relating to assisted reproduction at the moment which could eventually have dramatic consequences (positive and negative) for your assisted reproduction journey. Below is a short summary of many of these proposals (However, as always, it is imperative that you obtain legal advice particular to your situation from NFLC or an attorney licensed in the state whose laws impact your journey.)
Arizona
AZ SB 1306 and HR 2651 dictates information to be included as part of the informed consent process and prohibits the purchase, offer to purchase or advertisement for the purchase of human eggs (in effect denying Arizona residents the option of using egg donation).
California
CA AB 2426 would prevent non-attorney surrogacy practitioners from having direct access to their client’s funds. Non-attorney surrogate practitioners would be required to deposit their clients’ unearned funds into either an: (1) independent and bonded escrow company, or (2) a trust account maintained by an attorney.
Florida
FL S 7062, the Florida Assisted Reproductive Technology Act, would define an agency as any organization or individual who provides a database, matching or third party reproductive service (although there are no requirements related to agency training, education, or licensure). The Act would require agencies to conduct mental health evaluations and criminal background checks on donors, gestational surrogates and intended parents every two years and would prohibit donors or gestational surrogates who are not US citizens or permanent residents.
Illinois
IL HB 1082 (2009) amends a variety of Illinois statutes and would require an insurer, upon request of an insured intended parent, to provide maternity coverage for a gestational surrogate as a dependent for a term that extends throughout the duration of the expected pregnancy and for 8 weeks after the birth of the child. This is currently assigned to the Insurance Committee of the IL House of Representatives and would be effective immediately if passed.
Kansas
KS SB 509 creates women’s health and embryo monitoring program to collect and retain in “perpetuity” 70 data items, much of which is already collected and reported by the CDC. In addition, this bill requires tracking all eggs retrieved, fertilized, transplanted, frozen, and discarded, the status of all embryos, the number and type of fetal reductions, method for monitoring the health of patients even after they are no longer patients, and a reporting of how clinics are paid (failure to report or falsely reporting can result in felony charges).
Maryland
MD S 19 improves the existing infertility insurance requirement to reduce the two year wait period to one year.
MD HB 281 and SB 585 establishes a commission on surrogate parenting to evaluate the health and social well being of children born as a result of surrogacy.
Michigan
MI SB 647-652 and companion bills HB 5129-5134, impose reporting requirements on assisted reproduction clinics in addition to those already in place, including tracking and reporting of all embryos. This bill standardizes informed consent for ART and restricts stem cell research which was approved last year in a Michigan voters’ referendum.
Minnesota
MN SF 436/HF 890 adds presumption of parentage to paternity/maternity laws in favor of all intended parents in third-party ART matters. This bill has passed through committees in both the MN house and senate and awaits floor votes in each.
Missouri
MO HB 1035 requires group health insurance policies providing coverage for more than 25 employees to also cover the diagnosis and treatment of infertility, including up to four cycles of IVF.
Mississippi
MS Initiative Measure No. 26 is a ballot initiative seeking an amendment to the state constitution which would define an unborn child as a human being starting at fertilization. Under the express terms of the Mississippi Constitution, the Bill of Rights cannot be amended by the initiative mechanism and it will likely be struck down in court.
Oklahoma
OK HB 3077 would prohibit compensation to egg donors, but it died for lack of action by the OK senate committee.
Tennessee
TN SB 2136 and HB 2159, the Embryo Donation and Adoption Act, deems a child born from donated embryos as having been adopted and grants the same legal protections without court action. This bill also requires clinics to develop written contracts transferring ownership of embryos from donor to intended parents and to keep records for 21 years.
Washington
WA HB 2793 proposed to legalize compensated surrogacy in Washington, but it died for lack of action in the WA senate.
Posted on: March 4th, 2010 by admin
Same Sex Marriage Legalized in Washington, D.C.
The D.C. Council approved same-sex marriage on an 11 to 2 vote Dec. 15, and Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D) signed the bill into law soon after, saying that he hoped the District would provide a road map for gay rights activists in other jurisdictions, including possibly Maryland. Last week, Maryland Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler (D) said the state would begin recognizing same-sex marriages from other places. The law took effect March 3, 2010
Bishop Harry Jackson, pastor of Hope Christian Church in Beltsville, is one of the leading opponents of the law. Jackson, has tried unsuccessfully to block the measure by seeking a public vote on same-sex marriage.
There is also some concern the celebrations could be cut short by Congress or the courts. Members of Congress could try to block the District from implementing the law through the appropriations process, and the D.C. Court of Appeals has not ruled on Jackson’s efforts.
For the full story, visit The Washington Post online or click on the following link.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2010/03/02/ST2010030204682.html?sid=ST20100302046
|
|
|
