Get in touch

"Sperm Donor": the update on Masson v Parsons & Ors

Leila Chalk • Apr 20, 2019

Robert Masson and Susan Parsons were friends for 20 years, when they “privately and informally” conceived a baby girl. Ms. Parsons parents this child, along with her other children, with her wife. Though, Mr Masson has remained as a constant in his biological daughter’s life, and his name officially appears on the child’s birth certificate.

Both Ms. Parsons and her partner wanted to relocate to New Zealand. Mr Masson took legal action to prevent them from moving overseas with the child, though, within the process, was merely referred to as a “sperm donor”. As such, New South Whale state law fails to define a sperm donor as a “parent’, and thus, bears no parental rights, unless he is the husband or de facto partner of the mother, However, applying Commonwealth law, Justice Cleary found that Mr Masson was the father of the girl. This ruling was found on the account of Mr Masson’s consistent involvement in the child’s life, and his genetic contribution. It was also held that Ms Parsons and her partner were not in a relationship at the time of the child’s conception, and so, the NSW law is not applicable. As a consequence, Mr Masson was deemed to be the legal parent, and Justice Cleary was restrained Parsons and her partner from moving the child overseas.

Upon appeal, the Family Court overturned the finding based on the NSW Status of Children Act 1996, which stipulates that if a woman becomes pregnant by a man that is not her husband, or partner of any kind, the man is not presumed to be the father of the child. Therefore, Mr Masson was ultimately not deemed as the father of the child.

< Older Post Newer Post >

Call Us