116 3rd St SE
Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52401
Home / Opinion / Staff Columnists
SupCo ruling was right for Iowa's kids
May. 4, 2013 12:18 am
Last week's state Supreme Court ruling - that both spouses in a lesbian marriage should be listed on a child's birth certificate - wasn't just the only legally logical way the court could have come down on the issue, although it is that.
And please don't write to tell me all about how babies are made. I aced health class back in high school. I've got a couple of kids of my own. I'm sure our Supreme Court justices are equally well versed in matters both bird and bee.
Still, they unanimously upheld a lower-court ruling that the state Department of Public Health should not have refused to list Melissa Gartner on the birth certificate back in September 2009 when her wife, Heather, gave birth to their child, thereby denying Melissa the parental rights and responsibilities she signed up for when she and Heather decided to become parents.
The omission meant she couldn't approve medical treatment for their infant daughter. As the child grew, she wouldn't be able to enroll her in school or perform those other mundane legal tasks of parenting. And if Melissa and Heather ever got a divorce, Melissa wouldn't be obligated to support the child she helped bring into the world, if only by saying “yes.”
But what about the “real” father, you ask - the man who actually shares DNA with the child? As far as that goes, not a single thing has changed.
Before the ruling, a child's birth certificate automatically listed the mother's husband as the father - a guy who you know, either from health class or watching daytime soaps, isn't always, biologically, “dad.”
Even when everyone knew for certain the father wasn't the “father” - when a heterosexual couple became pregnant through artificial insemination - the husband-dad rule still applied.
Upshot is there are any number of us already running around with birth certificates naming parents to whom we are about as biologically related as I am to you. It doesn't matter, because those names aren't about DNA. They're about a promise.
A promise to be rock and anchor, drill sergeant, counselor, teacher, mentor, for 18 years and a lifetime. A promise to be there for the doctor visits, the school conferences, the practices and games. To be there.
Who cares if the people who make that commitment are fulfilling some sort of biological destiny or if they volunteer?
Either way, it's good.
Comments: (319) 339-3154; jennifer.hemmingsen@sourcemedia.net
The Iowa Supreme Court building in Des Moines.
Opinion content represents the viewpoint of the author or The Gazette editorial board. You can join the conversation by submitting a letter to the editor or guest column or by suggesting a topic for an editorial to editorial@thegazette.com