A sperm donor has been granted parental authority over the only child of a lesbian biological mother in a groundbreaking case.
The ruling was made in June by Australia’s Federal Family Court, which denied the mother custody of her nine-year-old child.
However, the court ruled in favor of her ex-partner and their sperm donor.
The custody battle between the three adults has been going on for nearly five years and has cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees. Herald Sun reported.
The boy was conceived through IVF and the female couple opted for donor eggs and donor sperm.
But all parties knew each other: the eggs were donated by a mutual friend of the biological mother and her then-partner, while the sperm was donated by a man the boy called “daddy.”
The sperm donor met the boy at birth and continues to spend time with him regularly, including staying overnight.
The man has always maintained that he would only agree to donate sperm if there was one condition: he would always be involved in his son’s life.
The biological mother and her ex-partner used donor eggs from a mutual friend and donated sperm from a donor who said he would only donate on the condition that he would be part of the child’s life (stock photo of the IVF process in the lab shown above)
But the biological father was never listed on the birth certificate. The biological mother claimed that he had relinquished his formal parental duties.
When the two mothers separated and started living apart, a messy custody battle ensued.
Over the past five years, the nine-year-old has spent time with each mother, as well as the sperm donor.
The trial judge ruled that characterising the father merely as a ‘sperm donor’ and not as someone concerned about the boy’s ‘well-being and development’ amounts to ignoring the facts of the case.
“This led to the conclusion that (the sperm donor) is indeed a parent of (the boy) in the normal sense of the word,” the researchers said.
‘The evidence unequivocally supports that (the sperm donor) has provided (the boy) with support and care since birth and continues to do so.
‘(The mothers) do not enjoy any superiority over any other person who is deeply interested in the welfare (of the boy), namely (the sperm donor).’
The biological mother, who lost her parental authority, wanted sole responsibility for the child.
But the biological mother’s ex-partner, who had improved her life after the breakup, fought for shared responsibility with the sperm donor.
The boy had his own independent attorney, who argued that it would be best for the boy’s needs to share responsibility among the three adults, or to give full custody to his sperm donor father.
The judge said it was in the nine-year-old’s best interests to take steps that would minimise the risk of further legal proceedings.
The judge stripped the biological mother of her parental authority and instead awarded it to her ex-partner and the sperm donor (stock image)
The judge said he believed this meant that the biological mother’s ex-partner and the sperm donor father were held jointly responsible, leaving the biological mother out of the picture altogether.
‘Regardless of whether the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility applies or is rebutted, I am satisfied that it is not contrary to law. [the boy’s] “It is in the interests of all three that they share parental authority over him,” the judge ruled.
‘[The boy] is a child who has medical and health needs and requires support. It is essential that important long-term decisions regarding these issues are made without delay and according to the best standards.
“It’s up to the parents whether (the boy) finally stops being embroiled in a lawsuit over him.”
The biological mother wanted to appeal the decision but was told there was no point, the Herald Sun reported.
In 2019, a majority of the Supreme Court ruled that a sperm donor was the legal father of a child because he had always been involved in her life.