## Facts

- An intended father (L.G.) and intended mother (A.T.) entered a traditional surrogacy agreement with a surrogate (J.J.E.), joined by her husband.
- J.J.E. was artificially inseminated with L.G.’s sperm, making her both the gestational and genetic mother; L.G. was the biological father.
- The intended parents paid approximately $73,000 in medical, legal, and related expenses during the pregnancy.
- Before birth, all parties jointly sought and obtained a juvenile court consent order declaring L.G. the legal father, granting custody to L.G. and A.T., and terminating J.J.E.’s parental rights.
- After the child’s birth, J.J.E. moved to vacate the consent order, invalidate the surrogacy contract, and obtain custody; the juvenile court denied relief.
- The court of appeals affirmed, and the Tennessee Supreme Court granted review to address public policy, jurisdiction, paternity, custody, and termination of parental rights.

## Issues

1. Whether Tennessee public policy permits enforcement of traditional surrogacy contracts and, if so, to what extent.
2. Whether a court may terminate a traditional surrogate’s parental rights through a pre-birth consent order based on a surrogacy contract rather than statutory termination procedures.
3. Whether the juvenile court had subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate paternity and custody arising from a surrogacy arrangement.
4. Whether the paternity and custody determinations in the consent order could stand if the termination of the surrogate’s parental rights was invalid.

## Decision

- The Tennessee Supreme Court affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded.
- The Court held that traditional surrogacy contracts are not categorically void as against public policy, but are enforceable only within statutory limits.
- The Court vacated the portion of the pre-birth consent order terminating the surrogate’s parental rights because it did not comply with statutory requirements for termination of parental rights.
- The Court affirmed that the juvenile court had subject matter jurisdiction to determine paternity and custody.
- The Court affirmed the paternity determination recognizing L.G. as the legal father and left custody matters to proceed under governing standards on remand, with the surrogate’s parental rights intact unless properly terminated.

## Legal Principles

- Tennessee public policy does not prohibit traditional surrogacy contracts per se; enforceability is limited by statutes governing parentage, custody, adoption, and termination of parental rights.
- Parental rights in Tennessee cannot be terminated by contract or by a pre-birth consent order that circumvents statutory termination procedures.
- Statutory safeguards for termination of parental rights are mandatory and cannot be waived by private agreement.
- Juvenile courts have statutory subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate paternity and custody, including disputes arising in the context of surrogacy arrangements.
- Custody determinations must be made under the child’s best-interests standard, and an invalid termination provision does not automatically resolve custody in favor of any party.

## Conclusion

The court permitted limited enforcement of traditional surrogacy agreements but held that a surrogate’s parental rights cannot be ended through pre-birth contractual consent; termination requires strict compliance with Tennessee’s statutory procedures, while juvenile courts may still determine paternity and custody subject to the child’s best interests.


In re Baby, 447 S.W.3d 807 (Tenn. 2014)