The Uniform Parentage Act defines the parent and child relationship as the legal relationship existing between a child and the childs parents, governs proceedings to establish that relationship, and establishes the jurisdiction of the courts under the act. Existing law provides that a party to an assisted reproduction agreement may bring an action under the act at any time to establish a parent and child relationship consistent with the intent expressed in that assisted reproduction agreement. Existing law allows an action to establish the parent-child relationship between the intended parent or parents and the child as to a child conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers to be filed before the childs birth and specifies the counties where that action may be filed.

This bill would extend the jurisdiction of the courts under the act to a proceeding to determine parentage of the child as to a child who is conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers if certain conditions are satisfied, including if the child is born in this state, or one or more of the parties to the assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers resides in this state or resided in this state at the time the assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers was executed.

Existing law requires an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers to contain specified information, including the persons from which the gametes originated, unless anonymously donated.

This bill would instead require an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers to contain information regarding the persons from whom the gametes originated, unless donated gametes were used, in which case the agreement shall specify whether the donated gamete or gametes were eggs, sperm, or embryos, or all.

Existing law provides that the donor of ova for use in assisted reproduction by a woman other than the donors spouse or partner is treated in law as if she were not the natural parent of a child thereby conceived, unless the court finds satisfactory evidence that the donor and the woman intended for the donor to be a parent.

This bill would replace the term woman with person in those provisions.

The Uniform Parentage Act defines the parent and child relationship as the legal relationship existing between a child and the childs parents, governs proceedings to establish that relationship, and establishes the jurisdiction of the courts under the act. Existing law provides that a party to an assisted reproduction agreement may bring an action under the act at any time to establish a parent and child relationship consistent with the intent expressed in that assisted reproduction agreement. Existing law allows an action to establish the parent-child relationship between the intended parent or parents and the child as to a child conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers to be filed before the childs birth and specifies the counties where that action may be filed.

This bill would extend the jurisdiction of the courts under the act to a proceeding to determine parentage of the child as to a child who is conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers if certain conditions are satisfied, including if the child is born in this state, or one or more of the parties to the assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers resides in this state or resided in this state at the time the assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers was executed.

Existing law requires an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers to contain specified information, including the persons from which the gametes originated, unless anonymously donated.

This bill would instead require an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers to contain information regarding the persons from whom the gametes originated, unless donated gametes were used, in which case the agreement shall specify whether the donated gamete or gametes were eggs, sperm, or embryos, or all.

Existing law provides that the donor of ova for use in assisted reproduction by a woman other than the donors spouse or partner is treated in law as if she were not the natural parent of a child thereby conceived, unless the court finds satisfactory evidence that the donor and the woman intended for the donor to be a parent.

This bill would replace the term woman with person in those provisions.

The Uniform Parentage Act defines the parent and child relationship as the legal relationship existing between a child and the childs parents, governs proceedings to establish that relationship, and establishes the jurisdiction of the courts under the act. Existing law provides that a party to an assisted reproduction agreement may bring an action under the act at any time to establish a parent and child relationship consistent with the intent expressed in that assisted reproduction agreement. Existing law allows an action to establish the parent-child relationship between the intended parent or parents and the child as to a child conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers to be filed before the childs birth and specifies the counties where that action may be filed.

This bill would extend the jurisdiction of the courts under the act to a proceeding to determine parentage of the child as to a child who is conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers if certain conditions are satisfied, including if the child is born in this state, or one or more of the parties to the assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers resides in this state or resided in this state at the time the assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers was executed.

Existing law requires an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers to contain specified information, including the persons from which the gametes originated, unless anonymously donated.

This bill would instead require an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers to contain information regarding the persons from whom the gametes originated, unless donated gametes were used, in which case the agreement shall specify whether the donated gamete or gametes were eggs, sperm, or embryos, or all.

The Uniform Parentage Act defines the parent and child relationship as the legal relationship existing between a child and the childs parents, governs proceedings to establish that relationship, and establishes the jurisdiction of the courts under the act. Existing law provides that a party to an assisted reproduction agreement may bring an action under the act at any time to establish a parent and child relationship consistent with the intent expressed in that assisted reproduction agreement. Existing law allows an action to establish the parent-child relationship between the intended parent or parents and the child as to a child conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers to be filed before the childs birth and specifies the counties where that action may be filed.

This bill would extend the jurisdiction of the courts under the act to a proceeding to determine parentage of the child as to a child who is conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers if certain conditions are satisfied, including if the child is born in this state, or one or more of the parties to the assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers resides in this state or resided in this state at the time the assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers was executed.

Existing law requires an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers to contain specified information, including the persons from which the gametes originated, unless anonymously donated.

This bill would instead require an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers to contain information regarding the persons from whom the gametes originated, unless donated gametes were used, in which case the agreement shall specify whether the donated gamete or gametes were eggs, sperm, or embryos, or all.

The Uniform Parentage Act defines the parent and child relationship as the legal relationship existing between a child and the childs parents, governs proceedings to establish that relationship, and establishes the jurisdiction of the courts under the act. Existing law provides that a party to an assisted reproduction agreement may bring an action under the act at any time to establish a parent and child relationship consistent with the intent expressed in that assisted reproduction agreement. Existing law allows an action to establish the parent-child relationship between the intended parent or parents and the child as to a child conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers to be filed before the childs birth and specifies the counties where that action may be filed.

This bill would extend the jurisdiction of the courts under the act to a proceeding to determine parentage of the child as to a child who is conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers if certain conditions are satisfied, including if the child is born in this state, or one or more of the parties to the assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers resides in this state or resided in this state at the time the assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers was executed.

Existing law requires an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers to contain specified information, including the persons from which the gametes originated, unless anonymously donated.

This bill would instead require an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers to contain information regarding the persons from whom the gametes originated, unless donated gametes were used, in which case the agreement shall specify whether the donated gamete or gametes were eggs, sperm, or embryos, or all.

Existing law authorizes 2 unmarried, unrelated adults who have chosen to share one anothers lives in an intimate and committed relationship of mutual caring to establish a domestic partnership by filing a Declaration of Domestic Partnership with the Secretary of State if both persons are members of the same sex or one or both are over 62 years of age. Existing law requires the Secretary of State to prepare the form for the Declaration of Domestic Partnership pursuant to specified requirements. The Declaration of Domestic Partnership requires, among other things, each person who wants to become a domestic partner to provide a mailing address.

This bill would make technical, nonsubstantive changes to this provision.

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 2349

Author:(Chiu)

As Amended Ver:August 10, 2016

Majority vote

Original Committee Reference: JUD.

SUMMARY: Clarifies, for assisted reproduction agreements, the personal and subject matter jurisdiction and venue of California courts. Specifically, this bill:

1. Provides that a person who enters into an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers (a surrogacy agreement) in California submits to the jurisdiction of courts in California for an action brought regarding a child who may have been conceived by assisted reproduction as a result of that agreement.
2. Provides that if a child is conceived using an assisted reproduction agreement, as defined, California courts have jurisdiction over a proceeding to determine parentage of that child if one of the following is satisfied:
   1. One or more of the parties to the agreement resides in California or resided in California when the agreement was executed;
   2. The medical procedures leading to conception, including in vitro fertilization or embryo transfer or both, were carried out in California; or
   3. The child was born in California.
3. Provides that the proper venue for an action with respect to a child conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is any county where:
   1. The child is anticipated to be born;
   2. The intended parents reside;
   3. The surrogate resides;
   4. The assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is executed; or
   5. The medical procedures pursuant to the agreement are to be performed.
4. Requires that an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers contain, among other things, information on the person from which the gametes originated, unless they were donated, in which case, the agreement does not need to specify the name of the donor, but must specify whether the donated gametes were eggs, sperm, embryo or any combination.
5. Adds legislative intent language on the existing subject matter jurisdiction of California courts regarding assisted reproduction agreements and the need to clarify that California courts have jurisdiction in cases involving assisted reproduction agreements when one or more parties may no longer live in California.
6. Clarifies when an egg donor is not considered a parent to ensure appropriate gender neutrality of the donee.

The Senate amendments add the egg donor clarification.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes the California Uniform Parentage Act. Defines a parent and child relationship as the legal relationship between a child and the child's natural or adoptive parents incident to which the law confers or imposes rights, privileges, duties and obligations.
2. Defines "assisted reproduction" as conception by any means other than sexual intercourse. Defines "assisted reproduction agreement" as a written contract that includes a person who intends to be the legal parent of a child born through assisted reproduction and defines the terms of the relationship between the parties to the contract.
3. Prohibits the parties to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, as defined, from undergoing an embryo transfer or commencing injectable medicine prior to the execution of the agreement. Requires that the parties to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers be represented by separate, independent counsel prior to the signing of the agreement. Requires that the agreement include the identity of the intended parents and, unless anonymously donated, the persons from whom the gametes originate.
4. Provides that a party to an assisted reproduction agreement may bring an action at any time to establish a parent-child relationship consistent with the intent expressed in the agreement. Requires the court, upon petition by any party to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, to issue an order establishing parentage.
5. Provides that a person who has sexual intercourse or causes conception with the intent to become a legal parent by assisted reproduction in California submits to the jurisdiction of courts in California with respect to an action brought regarding a child who may have been conceived by that act of intercourse or assisted reproduction.
6. Provides that the proper venue for a parentage action with respect to a child conceived through use of an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, but not yet born, is any county where:
   1. The child is anticipated to be born;
   2. The intended parents reside;
   3. The surrogate resides;
   4. The assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is executed; or
   5. The medical procedures pursuant to the agreement are to be performed.
7. Provides that the donor of egg for use in assisted reproduction by a woman other than the donor's spouse or nonmarital partner is treated as if she were not the natural parent of the child thereby conceived, unless the court finds satisfactory evidence that the donor and the woman intended for the donor to be a parent.

FISCAL EFFECT: None

COMMENTS: California has clear and supportive surrogacy laws and, as a result, has become a "surrogacy-friendly" state, with out-of-state intended parents coming to California to find surrogates. This sometimes causes a shortage of Californians willing to be surrogates, forcing California intended parents to use out-of-state surrogates. As a result of that and the fact that parentage of children born using surrogates must generally be established in court, multiple courts may be involved when surrogates and intended parents live in different states or countries. Particularly when multiple courts could be involved, issues of subject-matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction and venue must be carefully clarified. This bill seeks to do just that with respect to children conceived as a result of California assisted reproduction agreements.

Recent United States (U.S.) Supreme Court case makes clear that orders issued by a court of competent jurisdiction must be recognized by other states. The need for California courts to have unequivocal jurisdiction to decide matters involving California children and families was made clear earlier this month when the United States Supreme Court invalidated an Alabama Supreme Court decision that refused to recognize a Georgia adoption order. In that case, V.L. v. E.L. (2016) 577 U.S. __, involving a lesbian couple in a long-term relationship, V.L. gave birth to three children and E.L. later adopted them in Georgia. Years later, in a custody dispute in Alabama after the couple had separated, the Alabama Supreme Court refused to recognize the properly issued adoption order from Georgia, holding that the Georgia court did not have subject-matter jurisdiction based on Alabama's statutorily laws regarding adoption. The U.S. Supreme Court, per curium, rejected that decision, holding instead that Alabama was required to give full, faith and credit to the properly issued Georgia adoption order: "The Georgia judgment appears on its face to have been issued by a court with jurisdiction, and there is no established Georgia law to the contrary. It follows that the Alabama Supreme Court erred in refusing to grant that judgment full faith and credit." (Id. at p. 6.) Thus, as long as it is clear that our courts have jurisdiction over assisted reproduction agreement cases, other states who for whatever reason may disagree with our laws will nevertheless be required to give our properly issued court orders full, faith and credit.

This bill clarifies subject-matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction and venue for courts with respect to assisted reproduction agreements. To clarify the ability of California courts to enforce California assisted reproduction agreements, this bill does three main things. First, the bill provides that, if a child is conceived using a California assisted reproduction agreement, then California courts have subject-matter jurisdiction over a proceeding to determine parentage of that child if: 1) one or more of the parties to the agreement resides in California or resided in California when the agreement was executed; 2) the medical procedures leading to conception, including in vitro fertilization or embryo transfer or both, were carried out in California; or 3) the child was born in California. This is consistent with existing, though unpublished, case law, which recognizes that California courts of general jurisdiction can hear these matters. Second, it provides that a person who enters into a surrogacy agreement in California submits to the jurisdiction of courts in California for an action brought regarding a child who may have been conceived by assisted reproduction as a result of that agreement. This ensures that California courts have personal jurisdiction, and may adjudicate parentage, over individuals who entered into the contract in California, and is consistent with the required minimum contacts.

Lastly, for ease of determining where to bring these actions, the bill provides that the proper venue for an action with respect to a child conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is any county where: 1) the child is anticipated to be born; 2) the intended parents reside; 3) the surrogate resides; 4) the assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is executed; or 5) the medical procedures pursuant to the agreement are to be performed. These venue options are identical to existing law, which specifies that these are the venue options for an action brought under an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers.

Analysis Prepared by: Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916) 319-2334 FN: 0003980

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 2349

Author:

: in Senate

Vote:

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 7-0, 6/21/16

AYES: Jackson, Moorlach, Anderson, Hertzberg, Leno, Monning, Wieckowski

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 5/31/16 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill provides that California has subject matter jurisdiction to determine parentage of a child for a child conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers if certain conditions are satisfied, including: (1) the child is born in California; or (2) one or more of the parties to the agreement reside in California or resided in California when the agreement was executed. This bill also makes technical changes to the requirements of an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers.

Senate Floor Amendments of 8/10/16 replace gendered terms with non-gendered terms in Family Code Section 7613, which deals with conception through assisted reproduction with donated genetic material.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes the California Uniform Parentage Act, and defines a parent and child relationship as the legal relationship between a child and the child’s natural or adoptive parents, incident to which the law confers or imposes rights, privileges, duties and obligations. (Fam. Code Sec. 7600 et seq.)
2. Defines “assisted reproduction” as conception by any means other than sexual intercourse, and defines “assisted reproduction agreement” as a written contract that includes a person who intends to be the legal parent of a child born through assisted reproduction and defines the terms of the relationship between the parties to the contract. (Fam. Code Sec. 7606.)
3. Prohibits the parties to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, as defined, from undergoing an embryo transfer or commencing injectable medicine prior to the execution of the agreement, and requires that the parties to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers be represented by separate, independent counsel prior to the signing of the agreement. (Fam. Code Sec. 7962.)
4. Provides that a party to an assisted reproduction agreement may bring an action at any time to establish a parent-child relationship consistent with the intent expressed in the agreement, and requires the court, upon petition by any party to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, to issue an order establishing parentage. (Fam. Code Secs. 7630, 7962.)
5. Provides that a person who has sexual intercourse or causes conception with the intent to become a legal parent by assisted reproduction in California submits to the jurisdiction of courts in California with respect to an action brought regarding a child who may have been conceived by that act of intercourse or assisted reproduction. (Fam. Code Sec. 7620.)
6. Provides that the proper venue for an action with respect to a child conceived through intercourse or assisted reproduction is in one of the following:
   • the county in which the child resides;
     • if the child is the subject of a pending or proposed adoption, any county in which a licensed California adoption agency to which the child has been relinquished or is proposed to be relinquished maintains an office;
     • if the child is the subject of a pending or proposed adoption, the county in which an office of the department or a public adoption agency investigating the petition is located; or
     • if the parent is deceased, the county in which proceedings for probate of the estate of the parent of the child have been or could be commenced.  (Fam. Code Sec. 7620.)
7. Provides that the proper venue for a parentage action with respect to a child conceived through use of an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, but not yet born, is any county where:
   • the child is anticipated to be born;
   • the intended parents reside;
   • the surrogate resides;
   • the assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is executed; or
   • the medical procedures pursuant to the agreement are to be performed. (Section 7962 (e).)

This bill:

1. Provides that a person who enters into an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers (i.e., a surrogacy agreement) in California submits to the jurisdiction of courts in California for an action brought regarding a child who may have been conceived by assisted reproduction as a result of that agreement.
2. Provides that if a child is conceived using an assisted reproduction agreement, as defined, California courts have jurisdiction over a proceeding to determine parentage of that child if one of the following is satisfied:
   • one or more of the parties to the agreement resides in California or resided in California when the agreement was executed;
   • the medical procedures leading to conception, including in vitro fertilization or embryo transfer or both, were carried out in California; or
   • the child was born in California.
3. Provides that the proper venue for an action with respect to a child conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is any county where:
   • • the child is anticipated to be born;
     • the intended parents reside;
     • the surrogate resides;
     • the assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is executed; or
     • the medical procedures pursuant to the agreement are to be performed.
4. Requires that an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers contain, among other things, information on the person from which the gametes originated, unless they were donated, in which case, the agreement does not need to specify the name of the donor, but must specify whether the donated gametes were eggs, sperm, embryo or any combination.

Background

It is the policy of the State of California to establish paternity for all children. The establishment of paternity provides children with equal rights and access to benefits such as health insurance, child support, and inheritance. (Fam. Code Sec. 7570.) Under existing law, a child born during a marriage to a wife who lives with her husband is conclusively presumed to be the child of the marriage. (Fam. Code Sec. 7540.) For a child born outside of a marriage, paternity may be established by a voluntary declaration of paternity or through another legal presumption of paternity. (Fam. Code Secs. 7573, 7611.) In the event that two or more presumptions of paternity arise, the court is required to find in favor of the presumption which on the facts is founded on the weightier considerations of policy and logic. (Fam. Code Sec. 7612.)

For most heterosexual couples, conception is achieved with the woman’s own eggs and the sperm of her male partner, making parental identity straightforward. However, individuals and couples are increasingly using assisted reproduction technology, which can rely upon donor sperm, donor eggs, donor embryos, and host wombs, thereby requiring the legal concept of parentage to evolve. Generally, donors of genetic material are treated under law as though they are not the parents of a child conceived from that material. For example, California’s Family Code treats sperm donors who are not married to the woman who conceives using the donor’s sperm as “if he were not the natural father of the child thereby conceived, unless otherwise agreed to by the woman and donor in writing prior to conception of the child. (Fam. Code Sec. 7613(b).) In most of these cases, the law instead looks to the “intended parents,” as defined by the California Supreme Court in Buzzanca v. Buzzanca (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 1410, which held that, regardless of who provides the eggs, sperm or uterus, the intended parent(s) are “the first cause, prime movers, of the procreative relationship.” (Id. at 1424.) Therefore, a parental relationship is often established when medical procedures are initiated and consented to by the intended parent(s), even in the absence of any biological relationship between them and the child(ren) created. In other situations, courts will look to an adult who has functioned as a parent to the child, and determine whether he or she fits an existing presumption under California law.

The definition of what constitutes a family, or how a family is created has been the source of legal tension which the Legislature has sought to address. AB 1349 (Hill, Chapter 185, Statutes of 2011) distinguished between known sperm donors who planned to co-parent with the mother and more traditional sperm donors who gave their genetic material without any expectation of parenting the child conceived. In 2013, the Legislature enacted AB 1403 (Committee on Judiciary, Chapter 510, Statutes of 2013) to update the Uniform Parentage Act by codifying case law which has applied presumptions of parentage neutrally with regards to gender, and make the Act’s provisions gender neutral where appropriate. SB 115 (Hill, 2013) sought to clarify how presumptions of parentage work in situations where an individual is both a presumed father and a sperm donor. AB 2344 (Ammiano, Chapter 636, Statutes of 2014) created three optional forms to allow intended parents to state their intention, in writing, to parent a child conceived with the use of assisted reproduction.

This bill, seeking to ensure that California court orders are respected in other states and that California maintains the ability to determine parentage in the event that a party to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers (i.e., surrogacy agreement) resides out-of-state, clarifies when the court may exercise subject matter jurisdiction over a child or parties to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/9/16)

Academy of California Adoption Lawyers

American Civil Liberties Union of California

The Anti-Defamation League

Equality California

National Center for Lesbian Rights

Our Family Coalition

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/9/16)

None received

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: In support, Equality California writes, “a clear statement of California courts’ jurisdiction over parentage actions arising from surrogacy agreements is necessary to ensure that other states will respect these orders. California courts already have jurisdiction over these cases, but without a clear statement of jurisdiction, questions can arise when courts of other states consider these orders. Women entering into gestational surrogacy agreements in California—in an effort to assist infertile and/or same-sex couples—need to know that the California courts will protect them by enforcing orders that came from California courts, which these surrogates relied on in deciding to offer their services as surrogates. And intended parents and their children need to know that their parentage will be secure no matter where they live or travel to.”

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 5/31/16

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Arambula, Atkins, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Quirk, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Rendon

NO VOTE RECORDED: Travis Allen, Gallagher

Prepared by:

8/15/16 9:21:42

**** END ****

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 2349

Author:

:

Vote:

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 7-0, 6/21/16

AYES: Jackson, Moorlach, Anderson, Hertzberg, Leno, Monning, Wieckowski

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 5/31/16 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Equality California

National Center for Lesbian Rights

DIGEST: This bill provides that California has subject matter jurisdiction to determine parentage of a child conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers if certain conditions are satisfied, including that the child is born in California, or one or more of the parties to the agreement reside in California or resided in California when the agreement was executed. This bill also makes technical changes to the requirements of an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes the California Uniform Parentage Act, and defines a parent and child relationship as the legal relationship between a child and the child’s natural or adoptive parents, incident to which the law confers or imposes rights, privileges, duties and obligations. (Fam. Code Sec. 7600 et seq.)
2. Defines “assisted reproduction” as conception by any means other than sexual intercourse, and defines “assisted reproduction agreement” as a written contract that includes a person who intends to be the legal parent of a child born through assisted reproduction and defines the terms of the relationship between the parties to the contract. (Fam. Code Sec. 7606.)
3. Prohibits the parties to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, as defined, from undergoing an embryo transfer or commencing injectable medicine prior to the execution of the agreement, and requires that the parties to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers be represented by separate, independent counsel prior to the signing of the agreement. (Fam. Code Sec. 7962.)
4. Provides that a party to an assisted reproduction agreement may bring an action at any time to establish a parent-child relationship consistent with the intent expressed in the agreement, and requires the court, upon petition by any party to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, to issue an order establishing parentage. (Fam. Code Secs. 7630, 7962.)
5. Provides that a person who has sexual intercourse or causes conception with the intent to become a legal parent by assisted reproduction in California submits to the jurisdiction of courts in California with respect to an action brought regarding a child who may have been conceived by that act of intercourse or assisted reproduction. (Fam. Code Sec. 7620.)
6. Provides that the proper venue for an action with respect to a child conceived through intercourse or assisted reproduction is in one of the following:

• the county in which the child resides;
• if the child is the subject of a pending or proposed adoption, any county in which a licensed California adoption agency to which the child has been relinquished or is proposed to be relinquished maintains an office;
• if the child is the subject of a pending or proposed adoption, the county in which an office of the department or a public adoption agency investigating the petition is located; or
• if the parent is deceased, the county in which proceedings for probate of the estate of the parent of the child have been or could be commenced.  (Fam. Code Sec. 7620.)

1. Provides that the proper venue for a parentage action with respect to a child conceived through use of an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, but not yet born, is any county where:
   • the child is anticipated to be born;
   • the intended parents reside;
   • the surrogate resides;
   • the assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is executed; or
   • the medical procedures pursuant to the agreement are to be performed. (Fam. Code Sec. 7962 (e).)

This bill:

1. Provides that a person who enters into an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers (i.e., a surrogacy agreement) in California submits to the jurisdiction of courts in California for an action brought regarding a child who may have been conceived by assisted reproduction as a result of that agreement.
2. Provides that if a child is conceived using an assisted reproduction agreement, as defined, California courts have jurisdiction over a proceeding to determine parentage of that child if one of the following is satisfied:
   • one or more of the parties to the agreement resides in California or resided in California when the agreement was executed;
   • the medical procedures leading to conception, including in vitro fertilization or embryo transfer or both, were carried out in California; or
   • the child was born in California.
3. Provides that the proper venue for an action with respect to a child conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is any county where:
   • the child is anticipated to be born;
   • the intended parents reside;
   • the surrogate resides;
   • the assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is executed; or
   • the medical procedures pursuant to the agreement are to be performed.
4. Requires that an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers contain, among other things, information on the person from which the gametes originated, unless they were donated, in which case, the agreement does not need to specify the name of the donor, but must specify whether the donated gametes were eggs, sperm, embryo or any combination.

Background

It is the policy of the State of California to establish paternity for all children. The establishment of paternity provides children with equal rights and access to benefits such as health insurance, child support, and inheritance. (Fam. Code Sec. 7570.) Under existing law, a child born during a marriage to a wife who lives with her husband is conclusively presumed to be the child of the marriage. (Fam. Code Sec. 7540.) For a child born outside of a marriage, paternity may be established by a voluntary declaration of paternity or through another legal presumption of paternity. (Fam. Code Secs. 7573, 7611.) In the event that two or more presumptions of paternity arise, the court is required to find in favor of the presumption which on the facts is founded on the weightier considerations of policy and logic. (Fam. Code Sec. 7612.)

For most heterosexual couples, conception is achieved with the woman’s own eggs and the sperm of her male partner, making parental identity straightforward. However, individuals and couples are increasingly using assisted reproduction technology, which can rely upon donor sperm, donor eggs, donor embryos, and host wombs, thereby requiring the legal concept of parentage to evolve. Generally, donors of genetic material are treated under law as though they are not the parents of a child conceived from that material. For example, California’s Family Code treats sperm donors who are not married to the woman who conceives using the donor’s sperm as “if he were not the natural father of the child thereby conceived, unless otherwise agreed to by the woman and donor in writing prior to conception of the child. (Fam. Code Sec. 7613(b).) In most of these cases, the law instead looks to the “intended parents,” as defined by the California Supreme Court in Buzzanca v. Buzzanca (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 1410, which held that, regardless of who provides the eggs, sperm or uterus, the intended parent(s) are “the first cause, prime movers, of the procreative relationship.” (Id. at 1424.) Thus, a parental relationship is often established at the time medical procedures are initiated and consented to by the intended parent(s), even in the absence of any biological relationship between them and the child(ren) created. In other situations, courts will look to an adult who has functioned as a parent to the child, and determine whether he or she fits an existing presumption under California law.

The definition of what constitutes a family, or how a family is created has been the source of legal tension which the Legislature has sought to address. AB 1349 (Hill, Chapter 185, Statutes of 2011) distinguished between known sperm donors who planned to co-parent with the mother and more traditional sperm donors who gave their genetic material without any expectation of parenting the child conceived. In 2013, the Legislature enacted AB 1403 (Committee on Judiciary, Chapter 510, Statutes of 2013) to update the Uniform Parentage Act by codifying case law which has applied presumptions of parentage neutrally with regards to gender, and make the Act’s provisions gender neutral where appropriate. SB 115 (Hill, 2013) sought to clarify how presumptions of parentage work in situations where an individual is both a presumed father and a sperm donor. AB 2344 (Ammiano, Chapter 636, Statutes of 2014) created three optional forms to allow intended parents to state their intention, in writing, to parent a child conceived with the use of assisted reproduction.

This bill, seeking to ensure that California court orders are respected in other states and that California maintains the ability to determine parentage in the event that a party to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers (i.e., surrogacy agreement) resides out-of-state, clarifies when the court may exercise subject matter jurisdiction over a child or parties to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

SUPPORT: (Verified 6/23/16)

Equality California

National Center for Lesbian Rights

OPPOSITION: (Verified 6/23/16)

None received

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: Equality California writes, “a clear statement of California courts’ jurisdiction over parentage actions arising from surrogacy agreements is necessary to ensure that other states will respect these orders. California courts already have jurisdiction over these cases, but without a clear statement of jurisdiction, questions can arise when courts of other states consider these orders. Women entering into gestational surrogacy agreements in California—in an effort to assist infertile and/or same-sex couples—need to know that the California courts will protect them by enforcing orders that came from California courts, which these surrogates relied on in deciding to offer their services as surrogates. And intended parents and their children need to know that their parentage will be secure no matter where they live or travel to.”

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 5/31/16

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Arambula, Atkins, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Quirk, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Rendon

NO VOTE RECORDED: Travis Allen, Gallagher

Prepared by: Nichole Rapier / JUD. / (916) 651-4113

6/24/16 15:50:26

**** END ****

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair

2015-2016 Regular Session

Bill No: AB 2349 (Author:Chiu)

Version: May 23, 2016

Hearing Date: June 21, 2016

Fiscal: No

Urgency: No

Consultant: NR

SUBJECT

Assisted reproduction agreements for gestational carriers

DESCRIPTION

This bill would provide that California has subject matter jurisdiction to determine parentage of a child conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers if certain conditions are satisfied, including that the child is born in California, or one or more of the parties to the agreement reside in California or resided in California when the agreement was executed.

This bill would also make technical changes to the requirements of an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers.

BACKGROUND

It is the policy of the State of California to establish paternity for all children. The establishment of paternity provides children with equal rights and access to benefits such as health insurance, child support, and inheritance. (Fam. Code Sec. 7570.) Under existing law, a child born during a marriage to a wife who lives with her husband is conclusively presumed to be the child of the marriage. (Fam. Code Sec. 7540.) For a child born outside of a marriage, paternity may be established by a voluntary declaration of paternity or through another legal presumption of paternity. (Fam. Code Secs. 7573, 7611.) In the event that two or more presumptions of paternity arise, the court is required to find in favor of the presumption which on the facts is founded on the weightier considerations of policy and logic. (Fam. Code Sec. 7612.)

For most heterosexual couples, conception is achieved with the woman’s own eggs and the sperm of her male partner, making parental identity straightforward. However, individuals and couples are increasingly using assisted reproduction technology, which can rely upon donor sperm, donor eggs, donor embryos, and host wombs, thereby requiring the legal concept of parentage to evolve. Generally, donors of genetic material are treated under law as though they are not the parents of a child conceived from that material. For example, California’s Family Code treats sperm donors who are not married to the woman who conceives using the donor’s sperm as “if he were not the natural father of the child thereby conceived, unless otherwise agreed to by the woman and donor in writing prior to conception of the child. (Fam. Code Sec. 7613(b).) In most of these cases, the law instead looks to the “intended parents,” as defined by the California Supreme Court in Buzzanca v. Buzzanca (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 1410, which held that, regardless of who provides the eggs, sperm or uterus, the intended parent(s) are “the first cause, prime movers, of the procreative relationship.” (Id. at 1424.) Thus, a parental relationship is often established at the time medical procedures are initiated and consented to by the intended parent(s), even in the absence of any biological relationship between them and the child(ren) created. In other situations, courts will look to an adult who has functioned as a parent to the child, and determine whether he or she fits an existing presumption under California law.

The definition of what constitutes a family, or how a family is created has been the source of legal tension which the Legislature has sought to address. AB 1349 (Hill, Ch. 185, Stats. 2011) distinguished between known sperm donors who planned to co-parent with the mother and more traditional sperm donors who gave their genetic material without any expectation of parenting the child conceived. In 2013, the Legislature enacted AB 1403 (Committee on Judiciary, Ch. 510, Stats. 2013) to update the Uniform Parentage Act (UPA) by codifying case law which has applied presumptions of parentage neutrally with regards to gender, and make the Act’s provisions gender neutral where appropriate. SB 115 (Hill, 2013) sought to clarify how presumptions of parentage work in situations where an individual is both a presumed father and a sperm donor. AB 2344 (Ammiano, Ch. 636, Stats. 2014) created three optional forms to allow intended parents to state their intention, in writing, to parent a child conceived with the use of assisted reproduction.

This bill, seeking to ensure that California court orders are respected in other states and that California maintains the ability to determine parentage in the event that a party to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers (i.e., surrogacy agreement) resides out-of-state, would clarify when the court may exercise subject matter jurisdiction over a child or parties to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers.

CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW

Existing law establishes the California Uniform Parentage Act, and defines a parent and child relationship as the legal relationship between a child and the child’s natural or adoptive parents, incident to which the law confers or imposes rights, privileges, duties and obligations. (Fam. Code Sec. 7600 et seq.)

Existing law defines “assisted reproduction” as conception by any means other than sexual intercourse, and defines “assisted reproduction agreement” as a written contract that includes a person who intends to be the legal parent of a child born through assisted reproduction and defines the terms of the relationship between the parties to the contract. (Fam. Code Sec. 7606.)

Existing law prohibits the parties to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, as defined, from undergoing an embryo transfer or commencing injectable medicine prior to the execution of the agreement, and requires that the parties to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers be represented by separate, independent counsel prior to the signing of the agreement. (Fam. Code Sec. 7962.)

Existing law provides that a party to an assisted reproduction agreement may bring an action at any time to establish a parent-child relationship consistent with the intent expressed in the agreement, and requires the court, upon petition by any party to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, to issue an order establishing parentage. (Fam. Code Secs. 7630, 7962.)

Existing law povides that a person who has sexual intercourse or causes conception with the intent to become a legal parent by assisted reproduction in California submits to the jurisdiction of courts in California with respect to an action brought regarding a child who may have been conceived by that act of intercourse or assisted reproduction. (Fam. Code Sec. 7620.)

Existing law provides that the proper venue for an action with respect to a child conceived through intercourse or assisted reproduction is in one of the following:

• • the county in which the child resides;
  • if the child is the subject of a pending or proposed adoption, any county in which a licensed California adoption agency to which the child has been relinquished or is proposed to be relinquished maintains an office;
  • if the child is the subject of a pending or proposed adoption, the county in which an office of the department or a public adoption agency investigating the petition is located; or
  • if the parent is deceased, the county in which proceedings for probate of the estate of the parent of the child have been or could be commenced.  (Fam. Code Sec. 7620.)

Existing law provides that the proper venue for a parentage action with respect to a child conceived through use of an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, but not yet born, is any county where:

• • the child is anticipated to be born;
  • the intended parents reside;
  • the surrogate resides;
  • the assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is executed; or
  • the medical procedures pursuant to the agreement are to be performed. (Fam. Code Sec. 7962 (e).)

This bill would provide that a person who enters into an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers (i.e., a surrogacy agreement) in California submits to the jurisdiction of courts in California for an action brought regarding a child who may have been conceived by assisted reproduction as a result of that agreement.

This bill would provide that if a child is conceived using an assisted reproduction agreement, as defined, California courts have jurisdiction over a proceeding to determine parentage of that child if one of the following is satisfied:

• • one or more of the parties to the agreement resides in California or resided in California when the agreement was executed;
  • the medical procedures leading to conception, including in vitro fertilization or embryo transfer or both, were carried out in California; or
  • the child was born in California.

This bill would provide that the proper venue for an action with respect to a child conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is any county where:

• • the child is anticipated to be born;
  • the intended parents reside;
  • the surrogate resides;
  • the assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is executed; or
  • the medical procedures pursuant to the agreement are to be performed.

This bill would require that an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers contain, among other things, information on the person from which the gametes originated, unless they were donated, in which case, the agreement does not need to specify the name of the donor, but must specify whether the donated gametes were eggs, sperm, embryo or any combination.

COMMENT

1. Stated need for the bill

According to the author:

AB 2349 provides a much-needed clarification regarding the jurisdiction of California courts. Although California courts are courts of general jurisdiction, and our family courts have taken jurisdiction over parentage determinations in surrogacy cases in the past, advocates for both surrogates and intended parents remain concerned that absent something explicit in California’s statutes, a surrogate’s home state may take jurisdiction to address parentage and custody in a way that is inconsistent with the surrogacy contract and with California’s Family Code Section 7962. Given that the child of California-intended parents will be a California child, the state courts and the Legislature have an interest in assuring that California has jurisdiction to address the parentage of these children up front. By making California’s jurisdiction over our gestational surrogacy cases explicit, the California Legislature would be acting to affirmatively protect families, including LGBT families, engaging in assisted reproduction efforts in California from having their parental rights infringed upon in another state.

1. Will create consistency and predictability for families using assisted reproduction

Courts may only hear matters over which they have jurisdiction. Subject matter jurisdiction relates to the issues before the court, and personal jurisdiction relates to the individual. California courts are of general jurisdiction which can hear a wide variety of cases over individuals who reside in California, do business in California, or are involved in events that take place in California. Courts are constitutionally required to find that an individual has minimum contacts with a state, such that the exercise of personal jurisdiction will not offend “traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.” (International Shoe v. Washington (1945) 326 U.S. 310.) In addition to jurisdiction, a court may not hear a case if the venue is improper. Proper venue generally requires that an action must be brought in a court in the county where a party resides or the event giving rise to suit took place.

This bill provides that the court has subject matter jurisdiction over any person who signed a surrogacy agreement in California and any child who was thereby conceived. Specifically, this bill provides that the court has subject matter jurisdiction to determine parentage if any of the following are met: (1) one or more of the parties to the agreement resided in California when the agreement was executed; (2) the medical procedures leading to conception were performed in California; or (3) the child was born in California. Similarly, this bill would establish proper venue in the county where an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers was executed, where either party resides, where the medical procedures took place, or where the child is anticipated to be born.

The U.S Constitution, requires that states give “full faith and credit” to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. In other words, valid court orders issued in any state (i.e., the jurisdictional requirements, venue requirements, and law were properly followed), must be acknowledged by other states. Thus, to the extent that a non-California court may not recognize or properly enforce California assisted reproduction agreements or related court orders, by clarifying subject matter jurisdiction and venue requirements, this bill will ensure that couples using an out-of-state surrogate may have the parentage of any resulting child determined in California or pursuant to a California pre-birth court order establishing parentage.

In support, Equality California writes, “a clear statement of California courts’ jurisdiction over parentage actions arising from surrogacy agreements is necessary to ensure that other states will respect these orders. California courts already have jurisdiction over these cases, but without a clear statement of jurisdiction, questions can arise when courts of other states consider these orders. Women entering into gestational surrogacy agreements in California—in an effort to assist infertile and/or same-sex couples—need to know that the California courts will protect them by enforcing orders that came from California courts, which these surrogates relied on in deciding to offer their services as surrogates. And intended parents and their children need to know that their parentage will be secure no matter where they live or travel to.”

Support: Equality California; National Center for Lesbian Rights

Opposition: None Known

HISTORY

Source: Author

Related Pending Legislation: None Known

Prior Legislation:

AB 960 (Chiu, Ch. 566, Stats. 2015) created uniform rules for intended parents, regardless of gender and/or marital status, and updated the optional, statutory assisted reproduction forms to be consistent with the provisions of this bill.

AB 2344 (Ammiano, Ch. 636, Stats. 2014) created three optional forms to allow intended parents to state their intention, in writing, to parent a child conceived with the use of assisted reproduction.

AB 1217 (Fuentes, Chapter 466, Statutes of 2012) required a surrogate mother and the intended parent(s), each represented by independent counsel, to execute a notarized or witnessed surrogacy agreement before the mother can begin medication for assisted reproduction.

AB 2356 (Skinner, Chapter 699, Statutes of 2012) excepted sperm donated by a sexually intimate partner of the recipient from second or repeat testing, as specified, if the recipient is informed of the testing requirements and signs a written waiver. Defined “sexually intimate partner” to include a known or designated donor to whose sperm the recipient had previously been exposed in a nonmedical setting in an attempt to conceive.

AB 1349 (Hill, Chapter 185, Statutes of 2011) provided that a voluntary declaration of paternity is invalid under specified circumstances, allowed a presumed parent to bring a motion set aside the voluntary declaration within a specified amount of time, and provided that a sperm donor would not be considered the natural father unless otherwise agreed to in writing.

Prior Vote:

Assembly Floor (Ayes 78, Noes 0)

Assembly Judiciary Committee (Ayes 10, Noes 0)

**************

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 2349

Author:(Chiu)

As Amended Ver:May 23, 2016

Majority vote

SUMMARY: Clarifies, for assisted reproduction agreements, the personal and subject matter jurisdiction and venue of California courts. Specifically, this bill:

1. Provides that a person who enters into an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers (a surrogacy agreement) in California submits to the jurisdiction of courts in California for an action brought regarding a child who may have been conceived by assisted reproduction as a result of that agreement.
2. Provides that if a child is conceived using an assisted reproduction agreement, as defined, California courts have jurisdiction over a proceeding to determine parentage of that child if one of the following is satisfied:
   1. One or more of the parties to the agreement resides in California or resided in California when the agreement was executed;
   2. The medical procedures leading to conception, including in vitro fertilization or embryo transfer or both, were carried out in California; or
   3. The child was born in California.
3. Provides that the proper venue for an action with respect to a child conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is any county where:
   1. The child is anticipated to be born;
   2. The intended parents reside;
   3. The surrogate resides;
   4. The assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is executed; or
   5. The medical procedures pursuant to the agreement are to be performed.
4. Requires that an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers contain, among other things, information on the person from which the gametes originated, unless they were donated, in which case, the agreement does not need to specify the name of the donor, but must specify whether the donated gametes were eggs, sperm, embryo or any combination.
5. Adds legislative intent language on the existing subject matter jurisdiction of California courts regarding assisted reproduction agreements and the need to clarify that California courts have jurisdiction in cases involving assisted reproduction agreements when one or more parties may no longer live in California.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes the California Uniform Parentage Act. Defines a parent and child relationship as the legal relationship between a child and the child's natural or adoptive parents incident to which the law confers or imposes rights, privileges, duties and obligations.
2. Defines "assisted reproduction" as conception by any means other than sexual intercourse. Defines "assisted reproduction agreement" as a written contract that includes a person who intends to be the legal parent of a child born through assisted reproduction and defines the terms of the relationship between the parties to the contract.
3. Prohibits the parties to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, as defined, from undergoing an embryo transfer or commencing injectable medicine prior to the execution of the agreement. Requires that the parties to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers be represented by separate, independent counsel prior to the signing of the agreement. Requires that the agreement include the identity of the intended parents and, unless anonymously donated, the persons from whom the gametes originate.
4. Provides that a party to an assisted reproduction agreement may bring an action at any time to establish a parent-child relationship consistent with the intent expressed in the agreement. Requires the court, upon petition by any party to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, to issue an order establishing parentage.
5. Provides that a person who has sexual intercourse or causes conception with the intent to become a legal parent by assisted reproduction in California submits to the jurisdiction of courts in California with respect to an action brought regarding a child who may have been conceived by that act of intercourse or assisted reproduction.
6. Provides that the proper venue for a parentage action with respect to a child conceived through use of an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, but not yet born, is any county where:
   1. The child is anticipated to be born;
   2. The intended parents reside;
   3. The surrogate resides;
   4. The assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is executed; or
   5. The medical procedures pursuant to the agreement are to be performed.

FISCAL EFFECT: None

COMMENTS: California has clear and supportive surrogacy laws and, as a result, has become a "surrogacy-friendly" state, with out-of-state intended parents coming to California to find surrogates. This sometimes causes a shortage of Californians willing to be surrogates, forcing California intended parents to use out-of-state surrogates. As a result of that and the fact that parentage of children born using surrogates must generally be established in court, multiple courts may be involved when surrogates and intended parents live in different states or countries. Particularly when multiple courts could be involved, issues of subject-matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction and venue must be carefully clarified. This bill seeks to do just that with respect to children conceived as a result of California assisted reproduction agreements.

Recent U.S. Supreme Court case makes clear that orders issued by a court of competent jurisdiction must be recognized by other states. The need for California courts to have unequivocal jurisdiction to decide matters involving California children and families was made clear earlier this month when the United States Supreme Court invalidated an Alabama Supreme Court decision that refused to recognize a Georgia adoption order. In that case, V.L. v. E.L. (2016) 577 U.S. __, involving a lesbian couple in a long-term relationship, V.L. gave birth to three children and E.L. later adopted them in Georgia. Years later, in a custody dispute in Alabama after the couple had separated, the Alabama Supreme Court refused to recognize the properly issued adoption order from Georgia, holding that the Georgia court did not have subject-matter jurisdiction based on Alabama's statutorily laws regarding adoption. The U.S. Supreme Court, per curium, rejected that decision, holding instead that Alabama was required to give full, faith and credit to the properly issued Georgia adoption order: "The Georgia judgment appears on its face to have been issued by a court with jurisdiction, and there is no established Georgia law to the contrary. It follows that the Alabama Supreme Court erred in refusing to grant that judgment full faith and credit." (Id. at p. 6.) Thus, as long as it is clear that our courts have jurisdiction over assisted reproduction agreement cases, other states who for whatever reason may disagree with our laws will nevertheless be required to give our properly issued court orders full, faith and credit.

This bill clarifies subject-matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction and venue for courts with respect to assisted reproduction agreements. To clarify the ability of California courts to enforce California assisted reproduction agreements, this bill does three main things. First, the bill provides that, if a child is conceived using a California assisted reproduction agreement, then California courts have subject-matter jurisdiction over a proceeding to determine parentage of that child if: 1) one or more of the parties to the agreement resides in California or resided in California when the agreement was executed; 2) the medical procedures leading to conception, including in vitro fertilization or embryo transfer or both, were carried out in California; or 3) the child was born in California. This is consistent with existing, though unpublished, case law, which recognizes that California courts of general jurisdiction can hear these matters. Second, it provides that a person who enters into a surrogacy agreement in California submits to the jurisdiction of courts in California for an action brought regarding a child who may have been conceived by assisted reproduction as a result of that agreement. This ensures that California courts have personal jurisdiction, and may adjudicate parentage, over individuals who entered into the contract in California, and is consistent with the required minimum contacts.

Lastly, for ease of determining where to bring these actions, the bill provides that the proper venue for an action with respect to a child conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is any county where: 1) the child is anticipated to be born; 2) the intended parents reside; 3) the surrogate resides; 4) the assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is executed; or 5) the medical procedures pursuant to the agreement are to be performed. These venue options are identical to existing law, which specifies that these are the venue options for an action brought under an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers.

Analysis Prepared by: Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916) 319-2334 FN: 0003032

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 2349

Author:(Chiu)

As Amended Ver:March 31, 2016

Majority vote

SUMMARY: Clarifies, for assisted reproduction agreements, the personal and subject matter jurisdiction and venue of California courts. Specifically, this bill:

1. Provides that a person who enters into an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers (a surrogacy agreement) in California submits to the jurisdiction of courts in California for an action brought regarding a child who may have been conceived by assisted reproduction as a result of that agreement.
2. Provides that if a child is conceived using an assisted reproduction agreement, as defined, California courts have jurisdiction over a proceeding to determine parentage of that child if one of the following is satisfied:
   1. One or more of the parties to the agreement resides in California or resided in California when the agreement was executed;
   2. The medical procedures leading to conception, including in vitro fertilization or embryo transfer or both, were carried out in California; or
   3. The child was born in California.
3. Provides that the proper venue for an action with respect to a child conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is any county where:
   1. The child is anticipated to be born;
   2. The intended parents reside;
   3. The surrogate resides;
   4. The assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is executed; or
   5. The medical procedures pursuant to the agreement are to be performed.
4. Requires that an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers contain, among other things, information on the person from which the gametes originated, unless they were donated, in which case, the agreement does not need to specify the name of the donor, but must specify whether the donated gametes were eggs, sperm, embryo or any combination.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes the California Uniform Parentage Act. Defines a parent and child relationship as the legal relationship between a child and the child's natural or adoptive parents incident to which the law confers or imposes rights, privileges, duties and obligations.
2. Defines "assisted reproduction" as conception by any means other than sexual intercourse. Defines "assisted reproduction agreement" as a written contract that includes a person who intends to be the legal parent of a child born through assisted reproduction and defines the terms of the relationship between the parties to the contract.
3. Prohibits the parties to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, as defined, from undergoing an embryo transfer or commencing injectable medicine prior to the execution of the agreement. Requires that the parties to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers be represented by separate, independent counsel prior to the signing of the agreement. Requires that the agreement include the identity of the intended parents and, unless anonymously donated, the persons from whom the gametes originate.
4. Provides that a party to an assisted reproduction agreement may bring an action at any time to establish a parent-child relationship consistent with the intent expressed in the agreement. Requires the court, upon petition by any party to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, to issue an order establishing parentage.
5. Provides that a person who has sexual intercourse or causes conception with the intent to become a legal parent by assisted reproduction in California submits to the jurisdiction of courts in California with respect to an action brought regarding a child who may have been conceived by that act of intercourse or assisted reproduction.
6. Provides that the proper venue for a parentage action with respect to a child conceived through use of an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, but not yet born, is any county where:
   1. The child is anticipated to be born;
   2. The intended parents reside;
   3. The surrogate resides;
   4. The assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is executed; or
   5. The medical procedures pursuant to the agreement are to be performed.

FISCAL EFFECT: None

COMMENTS: California has clear and supportive surrogacy laws and, as a result, has become a "surrogacy-friendly" state, with out-of-state intended parents coming to California to find surrogates. This sometimes causes a shortage of Californians willing to be surrogates, forcing California intended parents to use out-of-state surrogates. As a result of that and the fact that parentage of children born using surrogates must generally be established in court, multiple courts may be involved when surrogates and intended parents live in different states or countries. Particularly when multiple courts could be involved, issues of subject-matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction and venue must be carefully clarified. This bill seeks to do just that with respect to children conceived as a result of California assisted reproduction agreements.

Recent U.S. Supreme Court case makes clear that orders issued by a court of competent jurisdiction must be recognized by other states. The need for California courts to have unequivocal jurisdiction to decide matters involving California children and families was made clear earlier this month when the United States Supreme Court invalidated an Alabama Supreme Court decision that refused to recognize a Georgia adoption order. In that case, V.L. v. E.L. (2016) 577 U.S. __, involving a lesbian couple in a long-term relationship, V.L. gave birth to three children and E.L. later adopted them in Georgia. Years later, in a custody dispute in Alabama after the couple had separated, the Alabama Supreme Court refused to recognize the properly issued adoption order from Georgia, holding that the Georgia court did not have subject-matter jurisdiction based on Alabama's statutorily laws regarding adoption. The U.S. Supreme Court, per curium, rejected that decision, holding instead that Alabama was required to give full, faith and credit to the properly issued Georgia adoption order: "The Georgia judgment appears on its face to have been issued by a court with jurisdiction, and there is no established Georgia law to the contrary. It follows that the Alabama Supreme Court erred in refusing to grant that judgment full faith and credit." (Id. at p. 6.) Thus, as long as it is clear that our courts have jurisdiction over assisted reproduction agreement cases, other states who for whatever reason may disagree with our laws will nevertheless be required to give our properly issued court orders full, faith and credit.

This bill clarifies subject-matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction and venue for courts with respect to assisted reproduction agreements. To clarify the ability of California courts to enforce California assisted reproduction agreements, this bill does three main things. First, the bill provides that, if a child is conceived using a California assisted reproduction agreement, then California courts have subject-matter jurisdiction over a proceeding to determine parentage of that child if: 1) one or more of the parties to the agreement resides in California or resided in California when the agreement was executed; 2) the medical procedures leading to conception, including in vitro fertilization or embryo transfer or both, were carried out in California; or 3) the child was born in California. This is consistent with existing, though unpublished, case law, which recognizes that California courts of general jurisdiction can hear these matters. Second, it provides that a person who enters into a surrogacy agreement in California submits to the jurisdiction of courts in California for an action brought regarding a child who may have been conceived by assisted reproduction as a result of that agreement. This ensures that California courts have personal jurisdiction, and may adjudicate parentage, over individuals who entered into the contract in California, and is consistent with the required minimum contacts.

Lastly, for ease of determining where to bring these actions, the bill provides that the proper venue for an action with respect to a child conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is any county where: 1) the child is anticipated to be born; 2) the intended parents reside; 3) the surrogate resides; 4) the assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is executed; or 5) the medical procedures pursuant to the agreement are to be performed. These venue options are identical to existing law, which specifies that these are the venue options for an action brought under an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers.

Analysis Prepared by: Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916) 319-2334 FN: 0002679

Date of Hearing: March 29, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

Mark Stone, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2349

Author:(Chiu) – As Amended Ver:March 18, 2016

As Proposed to be Amended

SUBJECT: ASSISTED REPRODUCTION AGREEMENTS: JURISDICTION AND VENUE

KEY ISSUE: IN ORDER TO BETTER UPHOLD AND ENFORCE ASSISTED REPRODUCTION AGREEMENTS, should THE JURISDICTION AND VENUE of CALIFORNIA COURTS BE CLARIFIED?

SYNOPSIS

California has clear and supportive surrogacy laws and, as a result, has become a "surrogacy-friendly" state, with out-of-state intended parents coming to California to find surrogates. This sometimes causes a shortage of Californians willing to be surrogates, forcing some California intended parents to use out-of-state surrogates. As a result of this and the fact that parentage of children born using surrogates must generally be established in court, multiple courts may be involved when surrogates and intended parents live in different states or countries. Particularly when multiple courts could be involved, issues of subject-matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction and venue must be carefully clarified. This bill seeks to do just that with respect to children conceived as a result of California assisted reproduction agreements. This bill is supported by Equality California and the National Center for Lesbian Rights, who write that it will protect both surrogates and intended parents and their children, regardless of where they live or travel. There is no reported opposition.

SUMMARY: Clarifies, for assisted reproduction agreements, the personal and subject matter jurisdiction and venue of California courts. Specifically, this bill:

1. Provides that a person who enters into an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers (a surrogacy agreement) in California submits to the jurisdiction of courts in California for an action brought regarding a child who may have been conceived by assisted reproduction as a result of that agreement.
2. Provides that if a child is conceived using an assisted reproduction agreement, as defined, California courts have jurisdiction over a proceeding to determine parentage of that child if one of the following is satisfied:
   1. One or more of the parties to the agreement resides in California or resided in California when the agreement was executed;
   2. The medical procedures leading to conception, including in vitro fertilization or embryo transfer or both, were carried out in California; or
   3. The child was born in California.
3. Provides that the proper venue for an action with respect to a child conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is any county where:
   1. The child is anticipated to be born;
   2. The intended parents reside;
   3. The surrogate resides;
   4. The assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is executed; or
   5. The medical procedures pursuant to the agreement are to be performed.
4. Requires that an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers contain, among other things, information on the person from which the gametes originated, unless they were donated, in which case, the agreement does not need to specify the name of the donor, but must specify whether the donated gametes were eggs, sperm, embryo or any combination.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes the California Uniform Parentage Act. Defines a parent and child relationship as the legal relationship between a child and the child’s natural or adoptive parents incident to which the law confers or imposes rights, privileges, duties and obligations. (Family Code Section 7600 et seq. Unless stated otherwise, all further statutory references are to that code.)
2. Defines “assisted reproduction” as conception by any means other than sexual intercourse. Defines “assisted reproduction agreement” as a written contract that includes a person who intends to be the legal parent of a child born through assisted reproduction and defines the terms of the relationship between the parties to the contract. (Section 7606.)
3. Prohibits the parties to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, as defined, from undergoing an embryo transfer or commencing injectable medicine prior to the execution of the agreement. Requires that the parties to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers be represented by separate, independent counsel prior to the signing of the agreement. Requires that the agreement include the identity of the intended parents and, unless anonymously donated, the persons from whom the gametes originate. (Section 7962.)
4. Provides that a party to an assisted reproduction agreement may bring an action at any time to establish a parent-child relationship consistent with the intent expressed in the agreement. Requires the court, upon petition by any party to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, to issue an order establishing parentage. (Sections 7630, 7962.)
5. Provides that a person who has sexual intercourse or causes conception with the intent to become a legal parent by assisted reproduction in California submits to the jurisdiction of courts in California with respect to an action brought regarding a child who may have been conceived by that act of intercourse or assisted reproduction. (Section 7620.)
6. Provides that the proper venue for an action with respect to a child conceived through intercourse or assisted reproduction is in one of the following counties:
   1. The county in which the child resides;
   2. If the child is the subject of a pending or proposed adoption, any county in which a licensed California adoption agency to which the child has been relinquished or is proposed to be relinquished maintains an office;
   3. If the child is the subject of a pending or proposed adoption, the county in which an office of the department or a public adoption agency investigating the petition is located; or
   4.  If the parent is deceased, the county in which proceedings for probate of the estate of the parent of the child have been or could be commenced.  (Id.)
7. Provides that the proper venue for a parentage action with respect to a child conceived through use of an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, but not yet born, is any county where:
   1. The child is anticipated to be born;
   2. The intended parents reside;
   3. The surrogate resides;
   4. The assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is executed; or
   5. The medical procedures pursuant to the agreement are to be performed. (Section 7962 (e).)

FISCAL EFFECT: As currently in print this bill is keyed non-fiscal.

COMMENTS: California has clear and supportive surrogacy laws and, as a result, has become a "surrogacy-friendly" state, with out-of-state intended parents coming to California to find surrogates. This sometimes causes a shortage of Californians willing to be surrogates, forcing California intended parents to use out-of-state surrogates. As a result of that and the fact that parentage of children born using surrogates must generally be established in court, multiple courts may be involved when surrogates and intended parents live in different states or countries. Particularly when multiple courts could be involved, issues of subject-matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction and venue must be carefully clarified. This bill seeks to do just that with respect to children conceived as a result of California assisted reproduction agreements.

In support of the bill, the author writes:

AB 2349 provides a much-needed clarification regarding the jurisdiction of California courts. Although California courts are courts of general jurisdiction, and our family courts have taken jurisdiction over parentage determinations in surrogacy cases in the past, advocates for both surrogates and intended parents remain concerned that absent something explicit in California’s statutes, a surrogate’s home state may take jurisdiction to address parentage and custody in a way that is inconsistent with the surrogacy contract and with California’s Family Code Section 7962. Given that the child of California-intended parents will be a California child, the state courts and the Legislature have an interest in assuring that California has jurisdiction to address the parentage of these children up front. By making California’s jurisdiction over our gestational surrogacy cases explicit, the California Legislature would be acting to affirmatively protect families, including LGBT families, engaging in assisted reproduction efforts in California from having their parental rights infringed upon in another state.

Brief explanation of jurisdiction and venue: This bill involves subject-matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction, and venue so a brief explanation of those legal provisions is in order.

Courts can only hear matters over which they have subject-matter jurisdiction. Subject-matter jurisdiction is jurisdiction over the issues, not the individuals, involved. There are three types of subject-matter jurisdiction – general jurisdiction, limited jurisdiction and exclusive jurisdiction. California superior courts are general jurisdiction courts and can hear a wide variety of cases. Limited jurisdiction courts, like small claims court, can only hear certain matters, such as cases with damages of $10,000 or less. Exclusive jurisdiction courts are the only court entitled to hear certain matters, like federal bankruptcy courts.

Personal jurisdiction gives courts the authority to decide matters over particular individuals or entities. As a general rule, California courts have personal jurisdiction over individuals or entities who reside in California, do business in California or are involved in events that occur in California. However, courts are constitutionally prohibited from exercising personal jurisdiction unless the individual or entity has "minimum contacts" with the state. (International Shoe v. Washington (1945) 326 U.S. 310.) Under that case, a state court may only exercise personal jurisdiction over an individual if that individual has sufficient minimum contacts with the state such that the exercise of jurisdiction will not offend "traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice." (Id. at 316 (citations omitted).)

Even if a California court has jurisdiction to hear a particular matter and has jurisdiction over parties involved, the action must still be brought in the right branch of the court. An action involving an accident in one county must generally be brought in a court in that county. Likewise, a dispute between two parties who live in the same county must generally be brought in a court in that county. This is the venue determination. Venue is a strictly statutory requirement and does not involve constitutional considerations.

California law carefully spells out rules and protections for parties using assisted reproductions agreements to conceive children. California case law has long made clear that even without a genetic link, the parties who intended to bring a child into the world are the child’s legal parents. (Johnson v. Calvert (1993) 5 Cal.4th 84; Marriage of Buzzanca (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 1410).

In order to clarify the rights of all parties and to help protect both intended parents and surrogates, the Legislature passed AB 1217 (Fuentes), Chap. 466, Stats. 2012, which provides various requirements for surrogacy agreements. First and foremost, it requires that parties to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers be represented by separate, independent counsel prior to the signing of the agreement. This helps ensure that all parties, but particularly the surrogate, understand the terms of the arrangement and are protected from possible harms. Parties to an assisted reproduction agreement are also not permitted to undergo an embryo transfer or begin fertility treatments prior to the execution of the agreement. This ensures that all the terms of the agreement are spelled out before medical intervention begins.

An action to establish a parent-child relationship for a child conceived through surrogacy using an assisted reproduction agreement may be filed prior to the birth of the child; and that assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers, executed in accordance with required provisions and filed with the court, rebuts any presumption that the surrogate, and her spouse or partner, are the parents of the child. The court, in this case, is required to issue a judgment establishing a parent-child relationship for the intended parents. These provisions provide protection and predictability for parties to a surrogacy agreement, and help ensure that the parentage arrangement of the parties, as set out in the surrogacy agreement, is recognized by the court. And, because California court orders are entitled to full, faith and credit by other states, this helps ensure that the agreement of the parties is recognized throughout the United States.

Concerns raised that a non-California court may not properly enforce California assisted reproduction agreements. Obtaining a pre-birth parentage order is particularly important for intended parents using out-of-state surrogates. In these cases, under the Uniform Child Custody and Enforcement Act (found in California at Section 3400 et seq.), child custody is generally decided in the child's home state, which is the birth state for a newborn. (Section 3421.) As the result, if there is no pre-birth order, another state may not recognize a California surrogacy agreement and may not award parentage as set out in that agreement. However, that state would be required to give full, faith and credit to a California order establishing parentage under the agreement, assuming the California court had both subject-matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction. Hence, this bill is needed to clarify the law and make explicit that California courts have the jurisdiction necessary to hear appropriate surrogacy agreement cases.

Recent U.S. Supreme Court case makes clear that orders issued by a court of competent jurisdiction must be recognized by other states. The need for California courts to have unequivocal jurisdiction to decide matters involving California children and families was made clear earlier this month when the United States Supreme Court invalidated an Alabama Supreme Court decision that refused to recognize a Georgia adoption order. In that case, V.L. v. E.L. (2016) 577 U.S. __, involving a lesbian couple in a long-term relationship, V.L. gave birth to three children and E.L. later adopted them in Georgia. Years later, in a custody dispute in Alabama after the couple had separated, the Alabama Supreme Court refused to recognize the properly issued adoption order from Georgia, holding that the Georgia court did not have subject-matter jurisdiction based on Alabama's statutorily laws regarding adoption. The U.S. Supreme Court, per curium, rejected that decision, holding instead that Alabama was required to give full, faith and credit to the properly issued Georgia adoption order: "The Georgia judgment appears on its face to have been issued by a court with jurisdiction, and there is no established Georgia law to the contrary. It follows that the Alabama Supreme Court erred in refusing to grant that judgment full faith and credit." (Id. at p. 6.) Thus, as long as it is clear that our courts have jurisdiction over assisted reproduction agreement cases, other states who for whatever reason may disagree with our laws will nevertheless be required to give our properly issued court orders full, faith and credit.

This bill clarifies subject-matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction and venue for courts with respect to assisted reproduction agreements. To clarify the ability of California courts to enforce California assisted reproduction agreements, this bill does three main things. First, the bill provides that, if a child is conceived using a California assisted reproduction agreement, then California courts have subject-matter jurisdiction over a proceeding to determine parentage of that child if: (1) one or more of the parties to the agreement resides in California or resided in California when the agreement was executed; (2) the medical procedures leading to conception, including in vitro fertilization or embryo transfer or both, were carried out in California; or (3) the child was born in California. This is consistent with existing, though unpublished, case law, which recognizes that California courts of general jurisdiction can hear these matters. Second, it provides that a person who enters into a surrogacy agreement in California submits to the jurisdiction of courts in California for an action brought regarding a child who may have been conceived by assisted reproduction as a result of that agreement. This ensures that California courts have personal jurisdiction, and may adjudicate parentage, over individuals who entered into the contract in California, and is consistent with the required minimum contacts.

Lastly, for ease of determining where to bring these actions, the bill provides that the proper venue for an action with respect to a child conceived pursuant to an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is any county where (a) the child is anticipated to be born; (b) the intended parents reside; (c) the surrogate resides; (d) the assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers is executed; or (e) the medical procedures pursuant to the agreement are to be performed. These venue options are identical to existing law, which specifies that these are the venue options for an action brought under an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers. (Section 7962 (e).)

Author's proposed amendment to clarify personal jurisdiction: Under current wording of the bill, it is unclear how personal jurisdiction would apply to someone who entered into an assisted reproduction agreement in California and could even be applied to create personal jurisdiction over a child conceived using assisted reproduction but not pursuant to the agreement. Since this is not the author's intent, the author has rightly requested that the bill be amended to provide personal jurisdiction only with respect to a child conceived as a result of the agreement. Thus the author proposes to amend Section 7620(a) in the bill as follows:

A person who has sexual intercourse or causes conception with the intent to become a legal parent by assisted reproduction in this state, or who enters into an assisted reproduction agreement for gestational carriers in this state, thereby submits to the jurisdiction of the courts of this state as to an action brought under this part with respect to a child who may have been conceived by that act of intercourse or assisted reproduction, or who may have been conceived as a result of that assisted reproduction agreement.

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: Writing in support of the bill, Equality California and the National Center for Lesbian Rights state:

A clear statement of California courts’ jurisdiction over parentage actions arising from surrogacy arrangements is necessary to ensure that other states will respect these orders. California courts already have jurisdiction over these cases, but without a clear statement of jurisdiction, questions can arise when courts of other states consider these orders. Women entering into gestational surrogacy arrangements in California – in an effort to assist infertile and/or same-sex couples – need to know that the California courts will protect them by enforcing orders that come from California courts, which these surrogates relied on in deciding to offer their services as surrogates. And intended parents and their children need to know that their parentage will be secure no matter where they live or travel to.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Equality California

National Center for Lesbian Rights

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916) 319-2334