Sause and Schnitzer

Under ORS 109.239 (1977), amended by Or Laws 2017, ch 651, § 4, “a mere genetic connection that a gamete donor has to a resulting child does not, in its own right, confer parental status.”

Schnitzer and Sause are in a dispute over parental rights of child S conceived through in vitro fertilization (with Schnitzer’s sperm and Sause’s egg) and carried by a surrogate. Schnitzer sought a judgment from trial court that he was the S’s sole parent, and appealed a decision that found Sause to be S’s parent as well. Schnitzer assigned error to the trial court “treating Sause’s biological parentage as giving rise to a presumption of legal parentage,” and by not recognizing and enforcing the contract between him and Sause.  Sause contended that “genetic parentage carries with it some degree of parental rights.” Under ORS 109.239 (1977), amended by Or Laws 2017, ch 651, § 4, “a mere genetic connection that a gamete donor has to a resulting child does not, in its own right, confer parental status.” The court found that genetics “provide a connection” to a child, but Sause’s genetic connection alone did not establish her right as a parent. Schnitzer began the process of having a child through assuasive reproductive technology before a relationship with Sause even began.  Additionally, there is no evidence to establish that, though she through an egg retrieval procedure, she made a “commitment to be responsible for any resulting children.” The court held that the trial court erred in denying Sause’s motion to dismiss and request for a declaration that he is the sole parent. Reversed and remanded for entry of judgment declaring the rights of the parties.