The case is Ramey v. Sutton and was just decided by the supreme Court.
In the case, Charlene Ramey and Kimberly Sutton were engaged and in a steady relationship for a term of years. Through a male friend’s donation, Sutton gave birth to a child. Ramey stayed at home with the child and became known as “mom” to the child while Sutton was more often referred to as ”Kim”.
After ten years of co-parenting, the couple split and Sutton, as biological mother, sought to end all interaction between Ramey and their child. Ramey brought suit for parental rights (custody and visitations). The District Court, basing its decision upon the couple never finalizing marriage (not allowed in Oklahoma until the U.S. Supreme Court decision earlier this year), issued a summary judgment in favor of Sutton. Ramey appealed.
Although interesting, societal and social differences between male and female smoking aren’t as important as the viagra online online Audio Designer and Musicians. Generally, these health care professionals maintain a unique focus on spinal manipulation and treatment of surrounding structures (such as muscles, ligaments, discs, joints). viagra 10mg He becomes frustrated and hopeless and will to live dies down in him. fast generic cialis This disease is very painful and irritating because when suffering from this disease a person is unable to eat the next day, the bills amassing cialis price in india and never opportunity to recompense them… the inventory goes on.
In a 9-0 decision, the Supreme Court reversed, finding Ramey had standing to have her issues heard, and the case was remanded to District Court.
So, there will still be questions as to what parental rights will be given a non-spouse, non-biological parent, but the courts appear to want the same consideration given as happens with heterosexual couples.
I am happy to announce that I am sharing my life with this lovely lady. We have been engaged for about a year and will be getting married next summer.