Re Patrick [2002] FamCA 193
Court: Family Court
Judge: Guest J
Facts: The father entered into an agreement with the birth mother and her partner to provide sperm for the artificial insemination of the birth mother. Following unsuccessful negotiations regarding the parenting roles of each party, the mothers unilaterally decided to exclude the father and went into hiding. Court orders were obtained allowing the father to have gradually increasing contact; however, the relationship between the parties continued to deteriorate. After prolonged litigation, the Court concluded that the father could not be recognized as a legal parent for the purposes of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
Reasoning: In Australia, there is no specific decision addressing whether a sperm donor, whether anonymous or known, qualifies as a “parent” within the meaning of the Act. The Full Court has previously ruled that a sperm donor for a lesbian couple is not a “parent” for the purposes of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth) (Re B and J [1996] FLC 92-716; (1996) 21 Fam LR 186, per Fogarty J). According to Section 60H(3) of the Act, a child is considered the child of a man under the Family Law Act 1975 only if there is a specific state or territory law expressly conferring that status on a sperm donor. However, no such laws exist in any state or territory. Despite the father’s active role in Patrick’s conception and his ongoing efforts to establish a relationship with his son, he was not regarded as a legal parent of Patrick under the Act.
To read the full judgement go to: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FamCA/2002/193.html