Study Guide for Exam 3 Final Exam Parent Child Relationships Eugenics Buck vs Bell Skinner v Okla Roe vs Wade Positive create only the best and brightest increase the number of outstanding people Negative Prevent inferior breeders from breeding 1927 women was widowed and her ability to support herself is gone Uses charity and prostitution Her children are removed due to her behavior She was put into an institution One of the daughters gets pregnant and the family believes there is something wrong with the family Judge puts daughter in institution as feeble minded Nurse says the new baby is feeble minded VA says if you have 3 generations of feeble minded people the men women of those generations must be sterilized Can VA state law sterilize if 3 generations are feeble minded VA court says yes eugenics is a good way to make able bodied individual US courts says yes 3 generations of imbecilies are enough but they should have rights lawyer court etc to prove that she isn t feeble minded Upheld VA s law that permitted eugenic sterilization 1942 Oklahoma State law can order sterilization as punishment for crimes after multiple offenses in certain categories like robbery and theft but not for more serious crimes like embezzlement No Because the state law included some offenders but not others it was a violation of equal protection no reason to think the inhabitability of criminal traits follows the neat legal distinctions which the law has marked between those 2 offenses Stresses the fundamental nature of procreation 1973 Texas state law said that abortions were illegal Women gets pregnant and government tells her she says to have it She tells the doctor the pregnancy was a result of a rape but he won t help her Gets with a lawyer to challenge the state law The court decides that women have the right to choose And that abortion isn t a crime Creates a fundamental right to abortion for women constitutionally protected right via right to privacy Sets a 3 Trimester test 1 Unqualified right 2 Regulate the interests of maternal health 3 Post viability State regulation and even proscribing abortion Exceptions life and health of the mother Viability ability of fetus to live outside of mother Planned Parenthood v Casey Retreats from Roe Allows states to impose regulations that do not place an undue burden on the woman s right to abortion As long as the laws do not prevent a women from getting an abortion The regulations must keep the safety of the women in mind Makes the right a liberty interest Women do not have to tell the man that she is pregnant and the man does not have a say to whether the woman has an abortion Legitimacy Illegitimacy Law defined child born to married couple are legitimate Automatically receive all rights and benefits from the parent child relationship Rights like support inheritance receive public benefits Child born to unmarried parents illegitimate Legal and social disabilities from this status Zeppeda v Zeppeda Issue Can an illegitimate child sue his biological status for causing the legal disability Faces Plaintiff was an infant who sought damages lawsuit filed by mother from his biological father for causing him to be born illegitimate Holding Court acknowledges the legal social and judicial grounds that preclude a lawsuit for wrongful life to allow would open floodgates for race characteristics etc Case does recognize that child suffered injury by virtue of the legal status of illegitimacy Demonstrates the harsh legal institution of illegitimacy and major discrimination stemming from it NO You should be happy you re alive Levy v Louisiana SCT 1968 Made clear that illegitimate kids have rights based on parentage pro under Constitution Issue Is a law that treats illegitimate children differently than legitimate children for lawsuits for loss of a parent Facts Louisiana Statute allowed kids born in wedlock to recover for loss of mother but not illegitimate unmarried mom with 5 kids dies during surgery Holding Equal protection 14th amendment precluded the state from creating a right to sue in favor of legitimate child for the wrongful death of his parent and then excluding illegitimate kids from that right The state s action in making the classification must be rational purpose is to discourage illegitimacy status had nothing to do with what happened to mom Gomez vs Perez By TX State law and by common law a father has no right or duty to support its child if they are not married Daughter sues the father for the support he refuses to give her There s no reason to treat children different whether you re married to the mother or not Took until the 70s for fathers to be required to support any children they produce Stanly v Illinois What rights do the unwed father have under the constitution Mother dies children become wards of the state If the father really wanted the kids he should have showed that before the mother died Supreme Court decides that he can keep the kids if he can show he is competent but he fails the test and the kids go to the state Law presumes that the baby born to a husband and wife is their baby and not a boyfriend s Lali v Lali USCT 1978 Striking an inheritance law that treats an illegitimate child whose father has not legally recognized him as not a heir is not unconstitutional it creates an evidentiary issue unique to the problem It may be okay to treat children differently whether or not their parents are married New Reproductive Technology Assisted Conception Artificial insemination o Husband s consent Rs V Rs o Donor s responsibility known vs unknown o Death of the donor Hecht v Kane o AH homologous AI husband s sperm is used to inseminate the women Not usually affective because there s probably something already wrong with the sperm o AID Donor heterologous o CAI Combined Confused AI Mix husband and donor s sperm to try to get the women pregnant Should you tell the kid if you used a donor Rs v Rs In general if they are married the man must give consent written that he agrees with artificial insemination Husband gives oral consent Woman goes through the procedure and doesn t get pregnant The second treatment works but husband didn t show up They later divorce and husband claims that the kid is not his child There was no written consent Court says that no written consent was provided BUT husband never questioned conception when it occurred and he even went to the procedure with the wife The husband is responsible for child support for the child