## Facts

- Marla and Steven Culliton entered a gestational carrier agreement with Melissa Carroll, who agreed to carry embryos created from Steven’s sperm and Marla’s ova and to relinquish custody at birth.
- Carroll had no genetic connection to the twins; her role was limited to gestation and delivery.
- Before the expected birth, the Cullitons sought declaratory and injunctive relief directing Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center to list Marla as mother and Steven as father on the twins’ birth certificates and related records of birth.
- Carroll stipulated to the relief and no party disputed that the Cullitons were to be the children’s legal parents.
- While appellate review was pending, the twins were born under temporary orders delaying final parentage listings on birth records.

## Issues

1. Whether the Probate and Family Court had equity and declaratory-judgment authority to determine parentage in a gestational carrier arrangement and to order a hospital’s reporting of parentage on vital records.
2. Whether, on undisputed facts where intended parents are the genetic parents and the gestational carrier has no genetic tie and consents, the intended genetic parents should be declared the legal parents and listed as mother and father on records of birth.

## Decision

- The Supreme Judicial Court reversed the Probate and Family Court’s dismissal and remanded for entry of judgment for the Cullitons.
- The court held the Probate and Family Court had authority under its equity jurisdiction and the declaratory judgment statute to adjudicate parentage and order related relief concerning birth records.
- The court declared Marla and Steven Culliton the twins’ legal parents and ordered that they be listed as mother and father on all records of birth created under the vital records statutes.
- The court concluded the absence of a specific gestational carrier statute did not eliminate judicial power to resolve uncontested parentage in this setting.
- The court recognized that public health statistical interests could be met through confidential reporting separate from the legal parentage reflected on the birth certificate.

## Legal Principles

- Probate and Family Courts may use equity and declaratory-judgment authority to adjudicate parentage arising from assisted reproduction, including uncontested gestational carrier arrangements.
- In an uncontested gestational carrier case where intended parents are the genetic parents and the carrier has no genetic connection and consents, the court may declare intended genetic parents the legal parents and require birth records to reflect them from birth.
- Adoption and conventional paternity mechanisms may be inadequate to establish timely and accurate parentage in this context and need not be required when inconsistent with the parties’ genetic and intended parent-child relationship.
- Vital records may reflect legal parentage while permitting separate confidential collection of medical or statistical information about gestational carrier births.

## Conclusion

The court held that Massachusetts Probate and Family Courts can enter parentage judgments and related vital-records orders in uncontested gestational carrier cases and, where the intended parents are the genetic parents and the carrier consents and lacks genetic ties, the intended parents must be recognized as the legal parents and listed on the children’s records of birth without requiring adoption.


Culliton v. Beth Israel Deaconess Med. Ctr., 435 Mass. 285, 756 N.E.2d 1133 (2001)