If there is a disagreement regarding a child's adoption rights, one side must be a qualified parent, while the other is a third party.
In contrast to the third party, the parent in his claim is claiming a basic constitutional right. The constitution does not grant any basic rights to a private third party caring for another person's children. It is only in the presence of some exceptional circumstances or if the parents are unfit, that the child custody is transferable to a private third party.
If a child is born by a gestation mother, who is the carrier of the donated egg
The Court ruling outlines two primary reasons why the gestational carrier’s name ought to be included in the children's birth certificate. The first is to promote the general welfare of a child born out of wedlock, provide near practicable care, education and same rights to child support as those in wedlock. Second is for health reasons consistent with the best interest of the child.
If neither the gestation mother nor the biological father wanted the gestational carrier's name listed on the birth certificate as the "mother" of the children.
Section 4-211 of the Health General Article provides that under the order of a court of competent jurisdiction regarding the parentage, adoption, or legitimation of a child, there is no reason prohibiting the issuance of a new birth certificate without naming a "mother.
If the parents of a child fail to agree at birth and continue to disagree upon the child’s surname.
The proceeding should address the best interest of the child. It being a matter of equity, the doctrine of laches applies. If the father delays in seeking determination of paternity, the court rules that the father has acquiesced in the mother’s naming thereby treating his challenge as a name change request.
