ABSTRACT
This chapter argues that the decision to grant the father substantial contact with the child despite the legislative severing of his paternal identity and the strenuous opposition of the mother and co-parent was influenced by an unacknowledged perception that the biological connection was inherently significant. It suggests that the biological imperative will continue to influence judicial decisions even where the legislation explicitly severs the nexus between biology and parenting. Dolgin highlights the transition from a traditional context whereby the family represented a private space separate from the public sphere of the marketplace. The legislative framework in relation to legal parentage of children born using assisted reproductive technology, operating at both the state and federal levels, frequently fails to anticipate particular configurations of family and kinship which emerge. The federal nature of the Australian legal system considerably complicates the issue of defining parents in the context of assisted reproduction technology.
