Alabama Supreme Court Rules Against Lesbian Mother

Supreme court

Alabama Justices say that Georgia courts misinterpreted state adoption laws.

The Alabama Supreme Court has ruled that a Georgia woman’s adoption of children born by her ex-partner is not legally valid.

The women were in a long term relationship and made the decision together to use artificial insemination to conceive the three children. Both women agreed to the adoption.

After breaking up, the biological mother began questioning the validity of the Georgia adoption under Alabama law. Although the non biological mother is listed on the children’s birth certificates, her ex-partner has kept her from visiting the children.

The couple lived in both Georgia and Alabama during the adoption process. Friends advised the couple to reside in Georgia due to the state’s tolerance of LGBT adoption.

On Friday, the Alabama Supreme Court overturned an earlier decision made by the Alabama family court system to recognise the adoptions.

The woman’s lawyer, Cathy Sakimura, has stated that her client is extremely distraught over the decision as she has raised the children since birth. She went on to add that “Even though we have marriage equality there are still these challenges for same-sex parents in being recognized as a family.”

Sakimura also stated that “The Alabama Supreme Court’s refusal to recognize an adoption granted eight years ago harms not only these children, but all children with adoptive parents. Children who are adopted must be able to count on their adoptions being final—allowing an adoption to be found invalid years later because there may have been a legal error in the adoption puts all adopted children at risk of losing their forever families.”

The Alabama justices stated that “Georgia law makes no provision for a non-spouse to adopt a child without first terminating the parental rights of the current parents.”

However, one justice disagreed. Justice Greg Shaw argued that Alabama does not have the authority to decide whether Georgia courts correctly applied the state’s laws. He stated that this decision could set a “dangerous precedence” that would lead to all adoptions in Alabama being questioned.

In response to the decision, the woman said that “I am just a mom who wanted and prayed for these children and raised them from birth, and I hope every day that we can be together again.”

X
X