Indiana AG Argues Gay Parents Shouldn’t Be On Child’s Birth Certificate

Indiana’s attorney general proposes a reversal of listing both members of a same-sex couple on a child’s birth certificate. 

What We Know:

• In January, the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals found that Indiana limiting who can be called a parent is unconstitutional.
• Curtis Hill, Indiana attorney general, submitted a brief to the U.S. Supreme Court arguing the decision. The brief argues for reversing a federal appeals court ruling that both parents in a same-sex couple should be listed on their child’s birth certificate in Indiana. The case is one of the first dealings with same-sex marriage since Amy Coney Barrett’s supreme court confirmation. 
• In the brief, Hill writes, “A birth mother’s wife will never be the biological father of the child, meaning that, whenever a birth-mother’s wife gains presumptive ‘parentage’ status, a biological father’s rights and obligations to the child have necessarily been undermined without proper adjudication,”
• Hill’s first attempt to reverse the decision came in June when he requested the court to review the decision. The court reaffirmed its ruling. 
• The case originated with same-sex couple Ashlee and Ruby Henderson. County officials refused to list both parents on their son’s birth certificate, who Ruby conceived through artificial insemination. They filed a federal lawsuit in 2015 suing Indiana’s state health commissioner and Tippecanoe County Officials.
• The Hendersons contended that leaving one mother off the birth certificate leads to problems down the child’s life. Families may run into health insurance coverage issues, decisions on health care, making doctor’s appointments, and enrolling in school. Additionally, the Hendersons argued that forcing one parent to adopt, costing $4,000 to $5,000, is unfair.  

The petition is expected to be discussed in a conference with the high court on December 11th.