Georgia Victory Shows Progress—And Why LGBTQ+ Parents Must Still Protect Their Rights

In a sea of bad news, there was a tiny glimmer of good news on September 24, 2025, when the Georgia Court of Appeals in Bolton v. Bolton reversed the trial court's refusal to recognize Tiffany, a non-biological mother, as the parent of a child born to her wife through artificial insemination. The biological mother, Jennifer, had asserted that the presumption of legitimacy for children born in wedlock was inapplicable to couples in a same-sex marriage. Jennifer argued that Tiffany was not a parent because she had not adopted the child. Fortunately, for the child and for Tiffany, the Court of Appeals, citing Obergefell v. Hodges, affirmed that "when the United States Supreme Court held that same sex couples had the constitutional right to marry, all the benefits that attached to marriage flowed in." And this includes the presumption of parentage to a non-biological mother of a child born into the marriage. "Under Georgia law and the particular facts of this case, Tiffany is [the child's] parent, entitled to be treated as any other parent when the trial court makes its child custody determination."

This is terrific news for LGBTQ+ families in Georgia and ensures that non-biological parents will be treated fairly in the Georgia courts. And yet, something more is required because, sadly, this is not the case in all states. In Williams v. Vaughn (Oklahoma), currently on appeal, the Court found that a non-biological mother who was married to the biological mother when the child was born was not a parent because she had not adopted the child. Shockingly, the Court determined that the biological mother and the sperm donor were the legal parents, despite the existence of a Donor Agreement stating that the donor did not intend to be a parent. And in Gatsby v. Gatsby (Idaho), a non-biological mother who was on the child's birth certificate, was denied parentage because she had not complied with certain technical requirements of Idaho's Artificial Insemination Act (the use of a physician and state registration of consent) nor had she executed a Voluntary Acknowledgment of "Paternity" (only available to heterosexual couples in Idaho).

The marital presumption is the legal presumption that the spouse of a person who gives birth is the parent of a child born into the marriage. In many states, this is a rebuttable presumption that can be challenged on the basis of biology. No biological connection to the child, no parentage. Fortunately, here in Massachusetts, a birth certificate is sufficient proof of parentage and non-biological parents will be treated equally in our courts.

The reality, however, is that most of us travel outside of Massachusetts at some point, for vacations or to visit with family; some of us may relocate. If you are divorcing in a hostile jurisdiction or a biological parent is hospitalized, the non-biological parent's rights may be in jeopardy if they do not have a judgment of parentage or an adoption decree. This is why it is so important for LGBTQ+ families here and everywhere to ensure their parentage is legally established. Fortunately, Massachusetts provides several avenues for establishing legal parentage: both married and unmarried same-sex couples can complete a Voluntary Acknowledgment of Parentage (only fourteen states allow same-sex couples to sign a Voluntary Acknowledgment); coparent and multiple-parent adoptions are available; and judgments of parentage can now be obtained as a result of the passage of the Massachusetts Parentage Act.

It's heartening that our community continues to move forward, to marry, to have children, and to assert our humanity, despite what is happening politically all around us. Let's celebrate the Bolton decision out of Georgia, but let's not forget that we must protect our relationships to our children in every way we can to ensure that our children are never faced with the loss of a parent because we failed to do so.

Joyce Kauffman ©2025