(The Center Square) – While parents have long struggled to answer the question, “Where do babies come from?” Pennsylvania legislators have gotten one step closer to answering “Where do parents come from?” – legally speaking.
The House advanced a bipartisan bill Monday that would provide clear-cut guidance on what legally establishes a parent-child relationship within the commonwealth without changing the legality of any currently accepted methods nor changing custody laws.
“Knowing that you have the legal status of being someone’s child or someone’s parent with all the rights and responsibilities that come with that is foundational not only to the family unit but to who we are and who we become as people,” said the bill’s prime sponsor, Rep. Sanchez, D-Abington.
The legislation is derived from the 2017 update to the Uniform Parentage Act, which has been adopted by eight other states to create a cohesive legal framework defining parenthood across states. It takes into consideration issues like gamete donation, surrogacy, same-sex partnerships, and sexual assault. The original version of the act drafted in 1973 serves as the basis for many states’ laws on the subject.
The bill’s supporters say it will provide clarity and stability for children and families, while detractors like the conservative Pennsylvania Family Council, say it opens the door for abuse by allowing “intent-based parenting” by clarifying that the people who planned and prepared for a child are that child’s parents.
The group argues that the bill would essentially allow mothers with unwanted pregnancies to “sell” babies to the highest bidder, though financial compensation for surrogate mothers is already an established and legal practice within the state.
The bill’s co-sponsor, Rep. Sheryl Delozier, R-Camp Hill, spoke on the subject.
“There’s been a lot of misinformation being put out there and saying that this will legalize many things that are already legal here in Pennsylvania,” said Delozier. “I respectfully submit that Pennsylvania’s current situation with a complete absence of statutory protections for women who act as surrogates is more likely to leave a bad outcome for children and their intended parents.”
She said the current law, based in English common law, is the “wild wild west,” leaving the judicial branch to effectively legislate on questions of parentage. The legislation, she argued, would bring the state up to speed with the times and help protect families.
Rep. Barbara Gleim, R-Carlisle, stood in opposition to the bill.
“This bill is one of the most harmful bills for children before the legislature today because it would redefine parenthood based on intent and remove necessary judicial oversight,” said Gleim. “We must make sure that children are in safe homes, and they should not be sacrificed in the name of uniformity, convenience, or efficiency.”
Gleim claimed that the bill would allow parents to withhold information about potential genetic diseases by denying them access to their biological parents’ medical histories, a scenario that is not currently illegal when parents use sperm or egg donors. House Bill 350 specifies that when a child reaches age 18, they can request non identifying medical information about gamete donors.
Despite opposition, the bill passed 112-91. It will make its way to the Senate for a second time after it stalled during the 2023-2024 session.
“This is a pro-family bill. Children deserve to know who their parents are and not have that question in legal limbo,” said Sanchez. “This bill provides that stability.”
