Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
House committee hears testimony on House Bill 350 to codify Uniform Parentage Act
Loading...
Summary
Lawmakers and expert witnesses told the House Children and Youth Committee that House Bill 350 would modernize Pennsylvania parentage law to cover assisted reproduction, surrogacy and intent‑based parentage and to reduce inconsistent court outcomes, while preserving pregnant persons' bodily autonomy.
House Bill 350, the Uniform Parentage Act, received nearly two hours of testimony before the Pennsylvania House Children and Youth Committee on issues ranging from surrogacy contracts to how courts should determine parentage when assisted reproductive technology is used.
The bill’s prime sponsor, Representative Ben Sanchez, said the measure is intended to provide “clarity and certainty and consistency and predictability” in state parentage law. Supporters told the committee the bill would give families predictable routes to have both intended parents legally recognized at or soon after birth.
Why this matters: Witnesses said the lack of a comprehensive statutory parentage scheme in Pennsylvania produces inconsistent outcomes across counties and judges and can leave children without clear legal parents at birth, affecting access to health insurance, inheritance and child support. Judge Tara Toohill, a Luzerne County family court judge, told the committee that “defining who a legal parent is of a child can ultimately determine health insurance coverage, inheritance rights, in a state court, wills, trusts and estates, and also the right to child support.”
Testimony and key provisions Rebecca Libenayak, an adoption and assisted‑reproduction attorney, testified “in strong support of Pennsylvania House Bill 350,” saying the bill is modeled on the Uniform Parentage Act drafted by the Uniform Law Commission and would codify recent Pennsylvania case law, including the state Supreme Court’s March decision in Glover v. Junior. Libenayak said the bill “establishes a clear, accessible, and consistent framework for determining legal parentage” and expands administrative tools such as voluntary acknowledgments of parentage that can be used instead of court proceedings.
Darren Holst, testifying on behalf of the Pennsylvania Bar Association, also urged passage, saying the measure “modernizes archaic laws” and includes definitions for acknowledged, adjudicated, alleged genetic and presumed parents. Holst said the bill provides a statutory framework for surrogacy agreements, requiring provisions that address the intended parents’ responsibility for legal and medical expenses, the surrogate’s autonomy over health decisions and remedies for breaches of agreement.
Dr. Andrea Braverman, a clinical professor who directs fertility counseling training, described personal and clinical experience with assisted reproduction and egg donation and said legal uncertainty imposes emotional strain on families. She told the committee that many families seek protections and predictability when using donors or surrogates.
Questions from members and clarifications Committee members probed how the bill interacts with recent case law and with situations involving interstate relocation. Lawmakers asked whether the Supreme Court’s Glover decision rendered the bill unnecessary. Witnesses responded that Glover addresses intent‑based parentage but does not create the comprehensive statutory scheme the bill proposes, including uniform procedures for surrogacy, protections for donors, and administrative acknowledgments of parentage.
On surrogacy and bodily autonomy, witnesses and counsel emphasized that a surrogate’s right to make decisions about her own body remains intact under the bill. As counsel stated to the committee, a surrogacy contract "cannot" require a pregnant person to have or not have an abortion, and termination of a pregnancy would not automatically be treated as a breach of the agreement.
Representatives asked about cost and access. Witnesses said the bill could improve access for lower‑income families who rely on known donors or informal arrangements by allowing a written instrument or a voluntary acknowledgment of parentage instead of costly post‑birth litigation or adoption procedures.
Process and next steps Representative Sanchez said he expects to continue working with committee members and the bill’s co‑prime sponsors; he noted the House passed a similar bill last year but it did not advance in the Senate. The committee did not take any formal votes during the hearing; chairs indicated they will continue review and follow up with additional questions.
The hearing transcript and submitted written testimony were uploaded to the committee’s SharePoint site, and committee staff told members that testimony from those unable to appear was also included there.
