Child's lawyer suggests evaluation of 3-year-old in sperm donor case
Evaluation would be done by a psychologist
Posted: March 6, 2013
By Steve Fry
THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
The attorney representing a child who is the center of controversy in a case to determine whether a man who donated sperm is the father with legal responsibilities is seeking a study of what is best for the child.
Overall, the case focuses on a series of issues on reproductive rights and fertility. The Kansas Department for Children and Families has filed a civil lawsuit against William Marotta, who the agency contends is the father.
In a motion filed Monday, Jill Dykes, the guardian ad litem for the child, is asking Shawnee County District Court Judge Mary Mattivi to order that a local psychologist conduct an evaluation of the child, now 3 years old.
A guardian ad litem is an attorney appointed to represent the rights of the child in a legal case.
"In my opinion, this case is about what is in the best interests of the child," Dykes said Wednesday. "That is the bottom line."
Dykes said it is her belief that an expert is needed to evaluate the facts of the case, then offer to the judge whether it is in the best interests of the child to introduce "a third party," Marotta, into the child's life.
The child earlier was in the care of her biological mother and the mother's female partner.
In her motion, Dykes suggested that Mattivi appoint Susan Voorhees, a Topeka psychologist specializing in treating children, to conduct the evaluation.
The examination would be a "parenting/best interest of the child evaluation" of the girl.
Dykes said in the motion that based on a Kansas Supreme Court ruling issued Feb. 22 in a case involving same-sex parenting, she thought it would be helpful to Mattivi to have that evaluation conducted by an expert in the field.
Mattivi will decide at an upcoming hearing whether to order an evaluation of the child.
Mattivi has scheduled an evidentiary hearing in the case for April 9 and 10 and oral arguments for June 17.
In filings on March 1 in the case:
â– The KDCF is seeking a court order requiring Marotta to undergo genetic testing as part of the paternity determination.
â– Timothy Keck, the co-lead counsel for the KDCF, urged the judge to deny Angela Bauer's third-party motion to intervene in the case. Bauer is seeking co-parenting rights with Jennifer Schreiner, the biological mother of the 3-year-old. The two women earlier were lesbian partners but are no longer together. Marotta contacted them after they placed an advertisement seeking a sperm donor on Craigslist.
The KDCF's motion is to determine whether Marotta is the father of the child and seeks to have him pay child support, but Bauer has nothing to do with that, Keck said.
Bauer and Marotta separately cite the Feb. 22 Kansas Supreme Court ruling of Frazier v. Goudschaal in their filings.
In Frazier and Goudschaal, the justices upheld the right of a same-sex partner in a co-parenting relationship to petition courts on matters of child visitation or joint custody.
Bauer's use of the Frazier case to intervene is premature, Keck said.
In Marotta's motion to dismiss the paternity lawsuit, he contended he isn't a father "as a matter of law" but is a sperm donor as defined by Kansas statute.
Keck quoted the statute, which says the donor of [filtered word] provided to a physician to artificially inseminate a woman other than his wife isn't the child's birth father.
In this case, Marotta's sperm wasn't provided to a doctor for insemination, but rather Bauer did the artificial insemination "at home implementing a syringe and catheter purchased at a local medical supply store," Keck wrote.
Deny Marotta's motion to dismiss, Keck wrote.