Child Custody (United Kingdom) Tony's Parental Ri

Tony's attempt to exercise parental responsibility over the child conceived as a result of fertility treatment will be decided based on several factors. First, as noted in the case of The L Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v. Mr A, Mrs A, YA, ZA, The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, Mr B, Mrs B, English common law holds that children born within a marriage are presumed to be children of that marriage. This common law presumption has been extended even to more "modern" forms of insemination. In particular, this presumption is codified in the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 ("the 1990 Act"), which states that "[i]f at the time of the placing in her of the embryo or the sperm and eggs or of her insemination, the woman was a party to a marriage, and the creation of the embryo carried by her was not brought about with the sperm of the other party to the marriage, then . . . the other party to the marriage shall be treated as the father of the child unless it is shown that he did not consent to the placing in her of the embryo or the sperm and eggs or to her insemination." Thus, unless other circumstances apply, where a woman has been artificially inseminated during marriage, that woman's husband will be treated as the father of the child regardless of whether he was not the actual sperm donor so long as he did not withhold his consent to the insemination (See Re CH, 569).

. . .
hat Tony is the presumptive father of Cherie's child with all the attendant rights and protections thereto. Tony's Custodial Rights over the Born Children Tony's strongest argument in favor of his retaining custody of the children is that adjusting custody so the children will now live with Cherie and Betsy will likely cause psychological developmental problems in the children. For example, in the case of J. and Another Appellants v. C. and Others Respondents, the biological parents of a 10-year-old child lost custody of that child to foster parents who had raised the child during his life. Essentially, the biological parents argued that they were unimpeachable parents who had a right to the care and custody of their child unless the foster parents could establish otherwise. However, the lower court held, and appellate courts affirmed, that the child could suffer from significant adjustment problems if he was required after 10 years to return to his biological parents. The House of Lords, however, distilled the considerations of the case to simply ask what was in the best welfare of the child. The House concluded that removing the child from the home and family he had known all his life was not in the child's best interest
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Trust Tony's, NHS Trust, England Christian, Cherie Tony's, Appellants Respondents, Tony Cherie, Embryology Act, Re PC, Hewer Bryant, Appellants Cherie's, teaching hospitals, teaching hospitals nhs, hospitals nhs trust, biological parents, nhs trust, tony cherie, hospitals nhs, court found, court held, custody children, 1990 act, parental responsibility, sperm eggs insemination, placing embryo sperm, embryo sperm eggs,
Approximate Word count = 2361
Approximate Pages = 9 (250 words per page)