Facts
- A.A.B. (the mother) and her same-sex partner sought to conceive a child and asked B.O.C. (the partner’s brother) to provide sperm.
- The child was conceived through artificial insemination using B.O.C.’s sperm.
- The insemination occurred in a non-clinical setting rather than through a physician or clinic.
- The parties did not sign a written agreement defining B.O.C.’s status as a donor or parent.
- After the child’s birth, the mother sought to prevent B.O.C. from obtaining parental status; B.O.C. sought to be adjudicated the legal father with parental rights.
Issues
- Whether B.O.C. qualified as a “donor” under Fla. Stat. § 742.14, requiring relinquishment of parental rights and obligations as to the resulting child.
- Whether Fla. Stat. § 742.14 applies only when artificial insemination occurs in a clinical or medical setting.
- Whether the parties fit within the statutory “commissioning couple” exception that would remove the case from § 742.14’s donor rule.
Decision
- The appellate court reversed the trial court’s final judgment adjudicating B.O.C. as the child’s legal father.
- The court held B.O.C. was a sperm “donor” within the meaning of Fla. Stat. § 742.14 and therefore relinquished all paternal rights and obligations as to the child.
- The court held § 742.14 does not impose a clinical-setting requirement; non-clinical insemination does not prevent application of the statute.
- The court held the “commissioning couple” exception did not apply because the parties did not meet the statutory definition.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with treating B.O.C. as having no parental rights under § 742.14.
Legal Principles
- Under Fla. Stat. § 742.14, a sperm donor (absent an applicable statutory exception) relinquishes all parental rights and obligations with respect to the donation and any resulting child.
- The applicability of § 742.14 turns on the donor relationship defined by statute, not on whether insemination was conducted in a clinic or by medical personnel.
- The “commissioning couple” exception is limited to the statutory definition and does not extend to arrangements that do not satisfy that definition.
- When § 742.14 applies, the donor is a legal non-parent and cannot obtain a paternity adjudication based solely on genetic connection.
Conclusion
The court applied Florida’s donor statute to bar a known sperm provider from establishing paternity, holding that § 742.14 terminates donor parental rights even when insemination occurs outside a medical setting and no statutory exception applies.