Australia's top court rules sperm donor is 11-year-old's legal parent
澳大利亞最高法院裁定，捐精者是11歲兒童的合法父母

來源：CNN 翻譯：世界播

The High Court of Australia in Canberra on August 22, 2011.

攝於2011年8月22日，澳大利亞堪培拉高等法院

Australia's highest court ruled unanimously Wednesday that a sperm donor who had been actively involved in his daughter's life should be granted rights as a legal parent of the 11-year-old girl.

澳大利亞最高法院週三一致裁定，一名積極參與女兒生活的捐精者應被授予作爲這名11歲女孩合法父母的權利。

According to the High Court decision, the judge accepted that the 49-year-old Australian man had donated sperm to the girl's biological mother in 2006 with the intention of raising the child together.

根據高等法院的判決，法官相信這名49歲澳大利亞男子在2006年向女孩的生母捐獻了精子，目的是共同撫養孩子。

A lower court's decision had previously ruled that the man was a "sperm donor" and denied of his status as a parent.

此前，一家下級法院的裁決裁定，該男子是一名“捐精者”，並否認他作爲父母的身份。

An Australian legal expert said that while the ruling shouldn't be reason to "panic" for future parents considering using a sperm or egg donor, it highlighted the need to be cautious.

一位澳大利亞法律專家表示，儘管該裁決不應成爲未來父母考慮使用捐贈精子或卵子時“恐慌”的理由，但它強調了謹慎的必要性。

"We need to be careful when making these long-term life decisions. In the long term, the court won't consider what we thought at the time, or what we planned, but what is in the child's best interests," said Cassandra Seery, an associate lecturer in Law at Deakin University.

“在做這些長期的人生決定時，我們需要謹慎。從長遠來看，法庭不會考慮我們當時的想法或我們的計劃，而是考慮什麼對孩子最有利。”迪肯大學法律副教授卡桑德拉·西里說。

The court documents used the pseudonyms Robert Masson for the donor and Susan Parsons for the girl's biological mother.

法庭文件使用化名羅伯特·馬森代指捐贈者，蘇珊·帕森斯代指女孩的生母。

"He believed that he was fathering the child and would thus support and care for her. His name was entered on the child's birth certificate as her father,'' the judgment summary said.

判決概要上說，“他認爲自己是孩子的父親，因此會支持和照顧她。他的名字作爲孩子的父親登記在孩子的出生證明上。”

However, after the child's conception, the biological parents had a disagreement, and the girl lived apart from Masson, with Parsons and her partner.

不過，在受孕後，親生父母兩人發生了分歧，女孩與生父馬森分開住，和生母帕森斯以及她的伴侶居住。

Yet the man continued to be heavily involved in the girl's life, playing an "ongoing role in the child's financial support, health, education and general welfare," according to court documents.

然而，法庭文件顯示，這名男子仍然積極參與女孩的生活，“在孩子的經濟支持、健康、教育和一般福利方面繼續提供幫助”。

In 2015, Parsons and her partner announced that they planned to move to New Zealand with the girl. Masson initiated court proceedings, launching his lengthy legal battle for recognition as a parent, blocking the child and her family from moving overseas.

2015年，帕森斯和她的伴侶宣佈，他們計劃帶女孩一起搬到新西蘭。馬森向法院提起訴訟，開始了曠日持久的爭取父母身份的法律戰，阻止孩子和她的家人移居海外。

According to court documents, the Family Court of Australia ruled against Masson who then appealed to the High Court in the capital of Canberra.

根據法庭文件，澳大利亞家庭法庭做出了不利於馬森的判決，馬森隨後向堪培拉高等法院提出上訴。

Eventually, the judge deemed Masson's relationship with the child as an "extremely close and secure" attachment, and believed that his role in the girl's life surpassed that of a sperm donor.

最終，法官認爲馬森與這個孩子的關係是一種“極其親密和安全的”關係，並認爲他在這個女孩的生活中所扮演的角色超過了捐精者該做的。

Masson's lawyer, Tahlia Bleier, said that the term "sperm donor" implies that the man "does no more than provide his semen."

馬森的律師塔利亞·布萊爾說，“捐精者”一詞意味着這個男人“除了提供精液，別無其他”。

She argued that her client didn't suit this label, saying his "the established intention to co-parent and his enduring relationship and involvement" with the girl demonstrated his desire to be a father to his daughter.

她辯稱，她的當事人不符合這個標籤，稱他“已確定要共同撫養女孩以及他與女孩之間持久的關係和投入”，表明了他想成爲女兒父親的願望。

"Potentially we'll see an increase of cases in family court of donors seeking involvement in a child's life. Time will tell," Bleier said.

“我們可能會看到越來越多的捐贈者在家庭法庭上尋求參與孩子的生活。時間會證明一切。”布萊爾說。

The High Court didn't immediately respond to a request to be put in touch with the lawyers for Parsons and her partner.

高等法院沒有立即回應記者要求聯繫帕森斯及其伴侶律師的請求。

Legal expert Seery said that while the ruling could appear to have far-reaching consequences for parents with children by anonymous sperm donors, the High Court decision was in many ways a special case.

法律專家西里說，雖然這項裁決可能會對匿名捐精生下孩子的父母產生深遠影響，但高等法院的判決在很多方面都是一個特例。

"The sperm donor in this case clearly had a long-term ongoing connection with the child in question, they had a relationship that went beyond just visitations," she said, saying it would likely have been a different situation if the donor had been anonymous.

她說：“在這起案件中，捐精者顯然與孩子有着長期持續的聯繫，他們之間的關係不僅僅是探視。”她說，如果捐精者是匿名的，情況可能會有所不同。

But Seery added that it wasn't just LGBTQ couples or single parents who were vulnerable to these kinds of disputes. "These kind of parental conflicts can and do arise and it's just about everyone taking care when they're thinking about a child," she said.

但西里補充說，並非只有LGBTQ伴侶或單親父母容易受到此類糾紛的影響。她說：“這種親子關係間的衝突可能也確實會發生，不過每個人在考慮孩子的事情時都要謹慎。”