Out in the Mountains

Lesbian Second Parent Adoption

Approved in Vermont
Continued from page 1

County Probate Court which took the po-
sition that G/L second parent adoptions
were not permitted under Verrnont’s
adoption law. However, SRS did not at-
tend the hearing in November 1991 and
did not file an appeal during the statutory
waiting period after the adoption was ap-
proved.

In reaching his decision, Judge Ketcham
considered four main issues. The first
was to determine whether the adoption
was in the best interests of the child. All
the evidence clearly indicated that it was.
According to the opinion, “The Court is
fully aware that the love of a child toward
adults is not related to the sex of the
adult. The evidence is undisputed that the
Petitioners have extended their love ‘and
care to [Hannah]. [Hannah] has re-
sponded to that love. It is in the best in-
terest of [Hannah] to be assured that each
of these two people have the same degree
of legal relationship to her.”

The second concern was what would hap-
pen if Beth and Laura ever broke up. The
judge concurred with the testimony of the
director of a local child care center who
said that when a couple separates, it is in
the best interests of the child to maintain
a relationship with both parents in all cas-
es except where there has been child
abuse. If in the future Beth and Laura

‘ separate, they will have to work out a

custody arrangement just like any set of
divorcing parents.

A third issue concerned Betl1’s parental
rights. Normally in an adoption, the nat-
ural parent gives up all claim to the
child. Beth isn’t Hannah’s natural moth-
er, but the question remained whether
Laura would gain parental rights at
Beth’s expense if the adoption were ap-
proved. Murray argued that this case
most closely resembled a step-parent
adoption, in which natural parents do not
lose their rights when their new spouse
adopts their children. The judge also cit-
ed the District of Columbia opinion,
which found that the so-called “cut-off”
provision does not have to be applied in
situations where it is clearly in-
appropriate. Although Beth is not Han-
nah’s biological mother, Murray feels
the issues would have been the same if
she were.

And finally the big question: even
though the adoption was clearly in the
best interests of the child and the cor-
ollary issues had been satisfactorily re-
solved, is the adoption of a child by both
members of a gay or lesbian couple legal
in Vermont? Vermont adoption law al-
lows “a person or husband and wife to-
gether” to adopt a child. When Beth

PO Box 220
Hyde Park. Vermont 05655-0220

VALERIE WHITE

Humanist Minister
American Humanist Association

Namings - Weddings - Union Ceremonies - Memorial Services

(802)888-4100 Office
(802) 888-2977 Home

We Can
Illustrate

Your Ads

originally adopted Hannah, she did so as
a person under Vermont law. Susan
Murray argued that Laura was alsoa
person under Vermont law and, as such,
could adopt Hannah, adding that a pri-
mary purpose of the husband and wife
provision was to ensure that neither
spouse could adopt a child without the
consent of the other. In effect, she
argued that Vermont law permitted the
adoption by not specifically prohibiting
it, and the judge agreed with this inter-
pretation of the law.

When asked about the importance of this
decision Susan Murray says, “There are
only two cases now in the entire country
that have written opinions in this kind of
case, one in Vermont and one in Wash-
ington, D.C. So this will be used when-
ever anybody anywhere wants to make
the same kind of arguments. It was well
reasoned, it was thorough, which is very
rare, and it wasn’t based strictly on the
facts of this case. He (Judge Ketcham)
clearly found that it was in the best inter-
ests of this child for this woman to adopt
her. But he went further than that. He
said in addition, ‘I find that Vermont
law allows these adoptions.’...So he did
go beyond just the facts of this case.
And for that it’s very helpful.”

Although this case isn’t as famous as the
Hamilton custody case, legally it is
much more significant. Asked how she
feels about making legal history in Ver-
mont, Susan Murray says, “It always
feels good to win a case. And while I’ve
won other kinds of cases, this one felt
especially good because gay and lesbian
family issues have become important to
me.”

See page 4 for Beth and Laura's story.

Sage Russell V