A Shift in Utah Adoption Laws

by Emmylou Manwill & Tillie McInnis

Is it safe to assume that only a married couple can properly raise a child? If so, Utah’s current adoption laws are flawless. Yet Senator Ross Romero sees a big issue with this outdated perception; he frames his new Adoption by a Co-Parent Bill as a means of expanding all parental rights, but it's apparent that it would benefit the LGBTQ community. Romero’s proposed alterations would allow any couples that are co-habitating but either choose not to marry, or are unable to marry (i.e. a lesbian couple living together or even two brothers living together), the right to designate a partner as a “co-parent"--giving this person the right to legally adopt and help raise the child.

So far, Fox 13 stated that this bill will “allow gay couples, or any unmarried couple living together, to adopt.” Statements like this are misleading to the public because the bill clearly has stringent requirements. First off, the un-married, co-habitant spouse of a parent may not adopt a child unless the child has only one legal parent, who must also willingly join the petition for the person to adopt the child. In addition, the adopter must prove they have previously developed a parental relationship with the child and contributed to the “emotional or financial well-being” of the child, and of course, the decision must be in the best interest of the child.

This causes one to wonder why the media is framing the story in such a way? It could be due to a simple misunderstanding of the bill or a belief that this bill is of little importance due to a similar bill’s failure to pass in previous legislative sessions. Or it could be an attempt at stirring up opposition to any possibility of advancement in gay rights.

Ultimately, S.B. 126 will not allow any co-habitating couple to adopt any child; the child would have to already belong to one member of the couple without another active parent engaged in the child’s life. This would be one small, bittersweet step for the LGBTQ community, though the bill lacks the means to allow a gay couple to apply for adoption through an adoption agency.

In practicality, this bill would be more beneficial to female couples in that one could give birth and the spouse could adopt said child. For male couples, it would prove slightly more difficult by bringing in the legality of surrogates, if they were to choose such a route. Nonetheless, this bill is perfect for all single parents in co-habitating relationships.

Although Romero is not convinced S.B. 126 will pass this year, he says it is important to keep the dialogue going in hopes that one day it will pass. With a continual effort from the Utah Legislature, there’s a chance that within the next few years gay couples will be able to adopt without such strict limitations. This is a step in the right direction for LGBTQ rights, but this bill is nowhere near as extensive as it needs to be.