Home | Entries tagged with 'in vitro'
Note: results are sorted by date added to the site, newest first.
Pratt, Katherine, Deducting the Costs of Fertility Treatment: Implications of Magdalin v. Commissioner for Opposite-Sex Couples, Gay and Lesbian Same-Sex Couples, and Single Women and Men. Wis. L. Rev. 1283-1347 (2009).
Pratt discusses the tax deductibility (and flexible spending account reimbursability) of various assisted reproductive technologies as they apply to opposite-sex infertile couples, gay and lesbian same-sex couples, and fertile and infertile unmarried women and men. While a diagnosis of “medical” infertility seems crucial, which fertility treatments are deductible, after the ruling in Magdalin v. Commissioner, is unclear. The answer seems tied to the taxpayer’s sex, marital status and sexual orientation. This disparate impact, while probably not unconstitutional, highlights the gendered, heterosexist perspective that is embedded in the tax code.
Trimacco, Courtney, K.M. v. E.G., My Two Moms: California Courts Hold That a Child Can Have Two Natural Mothers. U. Tol. L. Rev. 1065-1086 (2007).
In this analysis of the California case of K.M v. E.G. [117 P.3d 673 (Cal. 2005)] the author argues that state legislatures should more clearly define parenthood in light of recent advances in reproductive technologies. She asserts that parents using in vitro fertilization, surrogacy, ova donation or sperm donation should have statutorily defined rights.