Irish judges: Gay sperm donor should see his son
12.10.2009 3:30pm EST
(Dublin) The Irish Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a gay man who donated his sperm to a lesbian couple should be permitted to see his 3-year-old son regularly – in part because Ireland’s constitution doesn’t recognize the lesbians as a valid family unit.
The ruling was a legal first in Ireland, where homosexuality was outlawed until 1993 and gay couples are denied many rights given to married couples. Critics contend the case highlights how Ireland’s conservative Catholic 1937 constitution conflicts with contemporary European norms and fails to address the reality that hundreds of gay couples in Ireland have children.In their unanimous decision, the five judges of Ireland’s ultimate constitutional authority said a lower court erred by trying to apply the European Convention on Human Rights in favor of the lesbian couple. The Supreme Court concluded that when the two are in conflict, the Irish constitution is superior to European human rights law.
In her written judgment, Supreme Court Justice Susan Denham said the lesbian couple provide a loving, stable home for their son – but that the constitution defines parents as a married man and woman, and gays are not permitted to marry in Ireland.
She said Irish law does identify the sperm donor as the father, and he therefore had a right to have a relationship with his son.
“There is benefit to a child, in general, to have the society of his father,” Denham wrote. “I am satisfied that the learned High Court judge gave insufficient weight to this factor.”
In April 2008, High Court Justice John Hedigan ruled in favor of the lesbian couple and rejected the man’s application to have visitation or guardianship rights. The man immediately appealed.
In his ruling, Hedigan said Irish law contained nothing explicit to suggest that two women and a child possessed “any lesser right to be recognized as a de-facto family than a family composed of a man and woman unmarried to each other and a child.”
Hedigan said the European rights charter’s Article 8 did not discriminate between heterosexuals and gays in enshrining their right to a private family life.
The 42-year-old man, whose identity has been concealed throughout two years of legal wrangling, attended Thursday’s judgment and said he was overjoyed with the verdict.
The lesbian couple did not attend.
The Supreme Court appealed to both sides to negotiate an agreement on when the man could begin visiting his son. It referred the question of granting the man full guardianship rights back to the High Court.
The man testified that the lesbian couple had been his good friends, and he agreed to donate sperm to one of them on condition that he would be treated as the family’s “favorite uncle.”
But after the 2006 birth, both sides agreed that their relationship soured – reaching the breaking point when the two women decided to move to Australia with the boy.
The man successfully sued to prevent them from leaving Ireland pending a custody ruling.
Ireland’s parliament has yet to pass laws that effectively regulate fertility clinics or define the clashing parenting rights of gay couples versus sperm donors.
Earlier this month, the government opened debate on a Civil Partnership Bill that, if passed, would give gay couples many marriage-style rights, particularly in relation to property, finances and inheritance. It offers no legal recognition of their right to be parents.





If he wanted to be a father, he should have never agreed to be a “sperm Donor”
I can not agree with OOHaveAniceDayOO! If he had a relationship with the two women and all was good up until conception, then he has every right. Just because he agreed to allow to lesbians to use his sperm, does not mean that he gives up parent rights. Word for the wise…..GET EVERYTHING IN WRITING REGARDING YOUR CHILD!
This is absolutely the right ruling, unfortunately for all the wrong reasons. They all should be recognized and the lesbian couple should have never denied access.
The Irish Supreme Court ruled within the bounds of current Irish law. Sadly, it is a very antiquated law. I don’t understand what use it is to be part of the EU when enlightened laws put into place by the EU can be trumped by backwoods local law? A bit of advice to other lesbian families thinking of artificial insemination – go anonymous!!!
The donor should now be sued for child support!
i totally agree with 00HaveAniceDay00.
Ba choir don athair a mhac a fheiceail agus chun tacaiocht a thabhairt, go cinnte.
Translation: The father should see his son and give support, ceertainly.
Is ball i san Aontas Eorpach agus sa Pharlaimint Eorpach ata Eire. Roghnaigh a Eire, na dlithe an Aontais Eorpaich a leanuint. Roghnaigh cearta sibhialta eagsula a choimead, freisin.
Translation:
Eire is a member of the European Union and of the European Parliamint (where Gaeilge (Irish language) is one of many national languages in use there).
Choose Eire, to follow the laws of the European Union. Choose also to observe various civil rights. (den daoine aeracha, mar shampla, of gay people for example)
I think all parties should have been a little more explicit about how they were going to work this out. Had they made a legal contract with each other, this wouldn’t have happened. Having said that, I agree with North of Sixty that this was the right decision for all of the wrong reasons. Obviously the man wasn’t just a sperm donor, or the lesbian couple wouldn’t have invited him to stay in their lives and life of their child as an uncle. I also believe, that if this man wants to be recognized as the father, he should support the kid. What is antiquated about this ruling is the courts’ refusal to recognize the lesbians’ family. That is bigoted in my opinion.
Oooh, I’m kinda torn on this one. Im not a parent, but I think if they decided to stay friends and have the father in the childs life, and thats what he expected when they went through with the procedures, thats what they should stick to. But then again, the mothers of this child might be trying to keep a bad influence away from there child.
saying you are willing to be a donor is alot diffrent then seeing a child you helped createlive & breath.Just like the birth mother who agreas to adopt but after birth find they cant let go of the child.Do you villianize that woman as you do this “SPERM DONOR”????? Honestly human beings are flawed.So rather you agrea or disagea with the courts ruling there are 4 involved & I wish them all balance & harmony!
The father (sperm donor) may not have donated without expectation of participation in the child’s life. We don’t know the character of any of the involved adults. I don’t like seeing the donor have parent rights just as a donor but if he was led to believe he would have access to the kid it seems that the mothers reneging on the agreement wronged him.
Even if the lesbian couple had been recognized legally as a couple shouldn’t negate the agreement that seems to have been made between them and their donor. But he shouldn’t be allowed to prevent them from moving to another country. If he is given access then perhaps it’s his problem to follow them to another country. It’s a difficult situation and like one of the other bloggers said these contingencies ought to be a part of a donor contract that stipulates access and limits.
This is like a divorce where the parents are fighting over the kid after their former friendship has dissolved. There have been custody/visitation quarrels involving lesbian couples that have split after parenting with the biological mom claiming total custody wanting to prevent her former partner from visitation rights. Great arguments for marriage equality and adoption laws that spell out rights and clarify complications.
HaveANiceDay said: “If he wanted to be a father, he should have never agreed to be a ’sperm Donor’”.
For this case, I could not agree more. There is a huge difference between being a “father” to a child and simply being the biological father. Clearly there is a great degree of animosity between this lesbian couple and the sperm donor, and I would have to wonder if this child even knows the sperm donor as his father. If he doesn’t know him to be his father, or if the man has not served in a fatherly positon towards this child up to this point in the child’s life, then the courts could actually be creating a very traumatic environment for the child.
Although it’s difficult to pass judgement in this case as we do not know EXACTLY what the arrangement between the couple and the donor were, nor do we know what took place to cause the rift between them. Perhaps the sperm donor was trying to overstep the bounds of their agreement, but again we don’t know for sure.
I hope that, for the child’s sake, the adults in this case are able to work things out.
HOpefully the Govt will pass the civil unions bill.
Dealing another blow to the house of Pedophilia and Brutality in Rome.
The Catholic church has just been exposed in Ireland as an abuser of children just as it was in the USA. Why did the church keep this a secret and let the criminals keep their jobs, simply moving them to a new location so as to continue their vile crimes? Because the money the priests brought in was more important then the safety of the children. Because the rot evidently reaches all the way to the top.
And because if the truth came out, the church would be forced to excommunicate itself.
We are still waiting for the church of Adolph hitler and the hatred of the Jews which hitler utilized to get elected and give the world 50 million deaths to implode. And become a story of almost total corruption in the name of God, in our history books.