Attorney in sperm donor case draws connection to same-sex marriage rulings
William Marotta has been fighting effort to label him a parent of child conceived with his sperm
Posted: November 28, 2015
By Jonathan Shorman
The attorney for a Topeka sperm donor fighting attempts by the state to designate the donor a legal parent is drawing a connection between court rulings on same-sex marriage and his client’s case.
Charles Baylor represents William Marotta, who has been locked in a legal battle for years over whether he should be labeled the legal parent of a 5-year-old girl conceived with his sperm for a same-sex couple. The Department for Children and Families has been arguing he should, which would mean Marotta probably would have to pay child support.
In a court filing from less than two weeks ago, Baylor argues that the state shouldn’t discriminate against the lesbian couple by forcing the child to have a male parent.
In the filing, Baylor writes that DCF has “striven mightily” to establish Marotta’s paternity and ignore the claim of the woman’s partner to be the girl’s parent.
“In October 2012, when this case was filed, it may have been legally justifiable to look only for a non-custodial male upon whom to pin an obligation of child support. That day has passed,” Baylor writes in the filing.
Baylor drew attention to comments made earlier this month by DCF Secretary Phyllis Gilmore. At a legislative hearing on foster care, Gilmore told reporters DCF currently doesn’t prevent same-sex couples from serving in any way.
“It’s showing that DCF is not discriminating against same-sex couples in the context of their being foster parents. So I don’t know why DCF should discriminate against same-sex couples who have always been the parents to the child in this case,” Baylor said in an interview.
Baylor’s comments come after a June U.S. Supreme Court ruling that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. Baylor, in the court filing, cited the decision, along with other cases in arguing that in all the rulings is an insistence that government may not discriminate against gays and lesbians, especially in matters concerning their family relationships.
DCF spokeswoman Theresa Freed said the agency doesn’t comment on pending litigation. The state may possibly issue its own court filing in the coming week, however.
“There are laws, policies and procedures put in place within the child support system that serve to protect the integrity of the system, ensuring that children receive the support to which they are entitled,” Freed said.
In June, Shawnee County District Court Judge Mary Mattivi said that Marotta and the same-sex couple had failed to secure the services of a physician during the artificial insemination process and because of that he isn’t entitled to the same protections given other sperm donors. Mattivi said that the couple and Marotta didn’t conform to statutory requirements.
The Kansas Parentage Act requires enlisting the help of a licensed physician during the artificial insemination process. That requirement went into effect in 1973.
Marotta has said he didn’t intend to be the child’s father while agreeing to donate sperm to Jennifer Schreiner, who gave birth to the child in December 2009, and Angela Bauer, Schreiner’s same-sex partner at the time. Marotta got in touch with the women after they placed an ad seeking a sperm donor on Craigslist.
Supporters have established a page to raise money to help cover Marotta’s legal costs at http://www.gofundme.com/kstramplesrights .
Jonathan Shorman can be reached at (785) 295-5619 or jonathan.shorman@cjonline.com.
Follow Jonathan on Twitter @jshormanCJ.