California | Gay Parents | Jerry Brown | Mark Leno | News

BigGayDeal.com

CA Governor Jerry Brown Signs Bill Allowing Children to Have More Than Two Legal Parents

Brown

On a busy bill-signing day last Friday, California Governor Jerry Brown gave his signature of approval to legislation that will allow children in the state to have more than two legal parents. LA Times reports that Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) authored the bill to better address the custody and financial responsibilities of same-sex couples who have a child with an opposite-sex biological parent.

Mark Leno"Courts need the ability to recognize these changes so children are supported by the adults that play a central role in loving and caring for them," Leno (pictured right) said. "It is critical that judges have the ability to recognize the roles of all parents so that no child has to endure separation from one of the adults he or she has always known as a parent."

The bill was partially a reaction to a 2011 court decision involving a lesbian couple that briefly ended their relationship, according to Leno's office. One of the women was impregnated by a man before the women resumed their relationship. A fight broke out, putting one of the women in the hospital and the other in jail, but the daughter was sent to foster care because her biological father did not have parental rights.

Conservative groups in the state, including the Pacific Justice Institute, opposed the measure on the grounds that it was an attack on the traditional family and would be detrimental to children.

"This is in the long run going to be a mistake," [PJI president Brad] Dacus said. "The ones who are going to pay the price are not the activists, but it's going to be children, who will see greater conflict and indecision over matters involving their well-being."

Brown vetoed a similar bill last year that allowed a judge to recognize a third parent "in the best interest of the child." This year's version was narrower and will allow such a declaration only when the judge finds that failing to recognize more than two parents would be harmful to the child. 

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Given that three people usually can't even decide where to have lunch, this is a bad idea.

    Posted by: Frank | Oct 7, 2013 11:02:57 AM


  2. If the first Trollroad comment is agaist an idea, then, obviously, it's an excellent idea whose time has come.

    Posted by: oncemorewithfeeling | Oct 7, 2013 11:09:24 AM


  3. Yeah, anyone against this idea is a total jerk. It's maddening that anyone would want to come in-between a law expanding to fill needed spots and the people who suffer because the law doesn't help them. People are such jerks.

    Posted by: Fenrox | Oct 7, 2013 11:29:06 AM


  4. As if we needed more proof that liberal homosexual activists really have a vested interest in destroying families.

    Posted by: Hagatha | Oct 7, 2013 11:34:49 AM


  5. Wonderful news!

    Just in time for the two partners of a friend whose first baby is due this December.

    Posted by: Distingue Traces | Oct 7, 2013 12:03:45 PM


  6. As I understand it, this law permits an unrelated person to voluntarily and with permission of a biological parent commit to rights and responsibilities in the life of a child. So Johnny has a mommy and two daddies.

    For the life of me I can't see how a rational person can object to this. Moreover, it's hardly just a gay issue. Think of the countless heterosexual step parents who have responsibilities but no rights.

    As far as I can tell, this is simply a form of adoption that it already in practice, but without legal recognition or protection. Of all the BS bills that Jerry Brown will sign this year, bills which will trample the US Constitution and liberties of Californians, this bill stands apart as something that is wise if not critical.

    Posted by: Hagatha | Oct 7, 2013 12:21:51 PM


  7. I guess I understand the idea behind this, but I can't help but think that this is going to legal chaos. Three "parents" all fighting each other for custody? And who gets the child support payments and who has to pay?

    Posted by: Jonty Coppersmith | Oct 7, 2013 12:48:07 PM


  8. @Hagatha. You're an idiot troll. Now scamper along and go play in traffic.

    Posted by: Joseph | Oct 7, 2013 12:57:27 PM


  9. Joseph, if something I have said is incorrect then point it out. Otherwise, you are simply a monkey chattering.

    The only legitimate question I have heard about this bill in objection is the possibility that it could be abused by some folks looking to end-run immigration laws. The scenario put forth was that a person who is technically a US citizen could become a parent to an alien child, making that child a legal citizen who would then sponsor his real parents.

    Posted by: Hagatha | Oct 7, 2013 2:27:13 PM


  10. Whacked.

    Posted by: ED | Oct 7, 2013 3:22:15 PM


  11. @ed:

    Seriously? Adoptive parents, step-parents and blended families are "whacked" to you?

    Posted by: Distingue Traces | Oct 7, 2013 4:25:34 PM


  12. I might open a greeting card shop in W. LA. Mother's and Father's Day, and Adoptive Parents, Step Parents Days I'll have to hire extra staff. This new set up is going to take out a lot of trees.

    Posted by: BE | Oct 7, 2013 5:57:18 PM


  13. Yes, because the existence of adoptive parents and step-parents is a "new set up".

    Posted by: Distingue Traces | Oct 7, 2013 6:07:25 PM


  14. Somebody couldn't get it right. Keep kids out of it just to suit your perverse scenario. And we worry about the government shutdown?

    Posted by: PP | Oct 7, 2013 8:02:51 PM


  15. If you're going to adopt a different persona with each post, what's the point of keeping the format of the two-character signature?

    Posted by: Distingue Traces | Oct 8, 2013 12:25:20 PM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Winds of Homophobia Snuff Olympic Flame as it Reaches the Kremlin in Russia: VIDEO« «