vember 1992, and a February 1993 hear-
ing date in the Supreme Court was
scheduled. When they arrived at the
courthouse, Jane and Deborah saw the
reporters and cameras and wondered
who else might be in court that day be-
fore they realized that their case was the
focus of attention. Prior to their court
date, they had discussed what to do
about the press. They agreed that, al-
though at that point they wouldn’t use
their last names, they would talk with
reporters. Part of what they wanted to
do then, said Deborah, “was to let other
people know about it.”

Jane described their “fifteen minutes in
the spotlight.” They received several
call from the press, and agreed to talk
with a reporter from the New York
Times. Since the reporter indicated that
the editor wouldn’t run the story with-
out last -names, and they saw no com-
peling reason for trying to maintain an-
onymity, they agreed to the use of their
full names. They had no idea when the
article would appear. According to
Deborah, “One Sunday morning Jane’s
sister called and said, You’re in the
New York Times - in the front section.”
To see their names in the Times was,
admitted Jane, “a rush.” They received
several other calls from the media, in-
cluding the Maury Povich Show and
The Jane Whitney Show, which they
turned down. They did however talk
with Anthony Brooks from National
Public Radio. He came up to Vermont
and interviewed them for the NPR eve-
ning news program, All Things Con-
sidered.

When asked if she felt that their pri-
vacy had been compromised, Jane re-
sponded, “The issue becomes larger
than the privacy” although she said that
it has been a coming out process of
sorts for her. “sometimes I think...when
I’m out driving around, everybody
knows I’m a lesbian. That’s sort of

weird.” When they saw the story on the
news with the headline : Lesbian Moth-
er, “And there was my picture,” said
Jane, “It was a lot different after
that....any barriers that had been there
were gone.”

And then they waited. Deborah had
heard that all the big Supreme Court
decisions came down on Fridays, so
for a long time they maintained a
weekly phone vigil. After awhile they
returned to their daily routine, and so
when the phone call came on Friday,
June 18, 1993, it was a surprise. What
had started out as a matter of fact re-
sponse to a denial of insurance cover-
age evolved into a precedent setting
Supreme Court decision.

The decision of the Vermont Supreme
Court that a same sex partner may be-
come the adoptive parent of the natural
mother’s children was the first by any
state appellate or supreme court to ad-
dress this issue. It reversed the Wash-
ington County Probate Court’s denial
of the two adoption petitions field by
Deborah Lashman and Jane Van Buren.

Deborah, the newly adoptive parent, ac-
knowledged that it was wonderful to
have the Supreme Court affirm and rec-
ognize the relationship that she has al-
ways had with her sons. Both she and
Jane agreed that the best interests of
their children had been served. “all that
I wanted,” said Jane, “was what should
have happened a long time ago. I mean,
what’s the big deal?”

Jane and Deborah have several
friends who are considering filing
adoption petitions. All they want is
what’s best for their children. Perhaps
it won’t be a big deal. V

Aimée Green

@V)

Integratwe Massage ’ A  DEAN WITI'ER R£YNoLDs‘rNc.
Seven Burlington Square, Burlington, VT 05401

660_ 9238 (802) 863-7728

VIRGINIA TALBOT
Account Executive

WATSIBOO) 869-9660
FAX (802) 865-2157