On March 20, 2025, in Glover v. Junior, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania held that “the time has come for [Pennsylvania] law to embrace a fifth pathway to parentage,” adopting the doctrine of intent-based parentage into Pennsylvania’s common law.
In her latest blog, KingSpry’s Adoption and ART Practice Chair and Family Law Attorney, Dorota Gasienica-Kozak, Esq., reviews the Court’s decision in Glover and explains its impact on Pennsylvania adoptions.
Facts of the Case
Chanel Glover and Nicole Junior, a same-sex couple, got married in January of 2021. The couple later decided to pursue conception using in vitro fertilization (“IVF”) and entered into a contract with Fairfax Cryobank for donated sperm. According to the contract between the parties, Glover was the “intended parent” and Junior was the “co-intended parent.” Notably, only Glover, the intended parent, signed the contract.
Later, the couple moved to Pennsylvania and continued to work with the same fertility clinic. They entered into another contract wherein Glover signed as the “patient” and Junior signed as the “partner.”
In August of 2021, their child was conceived via IVF using Glover’s egg and the sperm from Fairfax Cryobank. A few months later, both Glover and Junior signed a representation agreement with an attorney in anticipation of Junior’s Confirmatory Step-Parent Adoption.
Unfortunately, the couple’s relationship deteriorated before the child’s birth.
Initiating Legal Action
On April 18, 2022, Glover filed for divorce. Days later, Junior filed a petition for special relief for pre-birth establishment of parentage and an emergency petition for the same. Junior was seeking a court order (1) confirming her as a legal parent of the unborn child, (2) requiring her to be informed as soon as Glover went into labor and granted access to the hospital and the child at birth, and (3) ordering that her name appear as the second parent on the child’s birth certificate.
The trial court found in Junior’s favor, which Glover appealed. The appellate court initially reversed the trial court’s holding, but upon re-argument, the appellate court agreed with the trial court’s decision.
Supreme Court Weighs In
The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania granted Glover’s appeal and considered whether the doctrine of intent-based parentage should be adopted in Pennsylvania where a child is conceived through Assisted Reproductive Technology (“ART”).
Ultimately, the Court found that the record contained extensive evidence of the couple’s mutual intent to bring the child into the world and raise them together. The evidence included jointly entering contracts, sharing costs, and signing affidavits stating their intentions. This was sufficient to establish Junior’s parentage under the new doctrine of intent-based parentage.
In its opinion, the Court encourages couples in similar circumstances to document their intentions in writing. While this is not necessarily required for establishing intent-based parentage, the Court suggests that documentation “provide[s] strong evidence of intent should a dispute arise.”
It should also be noted that the Court’s decision does not impact other paths to parentage already recognized by Pennsylvania law.
Key Takeaways for Families
In its long-anticipated decision, the Court has recognized and defined intent-based parentage in cases where a child is born through ART. Glover is undoubtedly a landmark adoption case in Pennsylvania.
We echo the Court’s suggestion that couples who intend to formally adopt their child via intent-based parentage should document such intentions in writing. Couples may find it beneficial to discuss and document said intentions with legal counsel to ensure a smooth process from start to end.
If you and your partner have questions regarding proper documentation and/or pursuing intent-based parentage, KingSpry’s ART Law Group Chair, Dorota Gasienica-Kozak, Esq., is prepared to assist you. Gasienica-Kozak is a fellow of the Academy of Adoption and Assisted Reproduction Attorneys (AAAA), a member of the American Society of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), a member of SEEDS, a promoter for RESOLVE: The National Infertility Association, and a committee member of the American Bar Association’s Family and ART Law sections.
heARTbeat is a publication of KingSpry’s Adoption and Assisted Reproductive Technology Law Group. These articles are meant to be informational and do not constitute legal advice.
