R.M. v. T.A.
Annotate this CaseMother "T.A." appealed a judgment finding that R.M. was the presumed father of her biological daughter. T.A. conceived the child through artificial insemination procedures, and R.M. was not the biological father. The trial court declared R.M. to be the child's presumed father by applying the parentage presumption in Family Code 7611(d). Mother claimed she chose to be a single parent of the child and raised numerous constitutional and other legal challenges to the manner in which the presumed parent statutory scheme was applied in her case. Based on the fundamental constitutional right to parent one's child without interference, she requested that the Court of Appeal establish a rule that a decision to form a single parent family should be afforded the same constitutional protection as a two parent familial arrangement. She also asserted the standards associated with the presumed parent statute did not adequately protect the constitutional rights of a single parent "by choice." After review, the Court of Appeal held that application of the presumed parent statutory scheme in this case did not constitute an unconstitutional interference with T.A.'s fundamental right to parent her child. Furthermore, the Court held the evidentiary record supported that R.M. was the child's presumed parent and that the presumption was not rebutted.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.