ABSTRACT
Modem technology has wreaked havoc on conventional and legal notions of parenthood. For example, the traditional legal presumption granting parental rights to a child's biological mother seems at least questionable when the biological mother differs from the intended mother. As a result, courts employing traditional constitutional and family law doctrines have not adequately sorted out the claims of biological gestational, and intended parents. In this Article, Professor Hill argues that the claims of those who first intend to have a child should prevail over those who assert parental rights on the basis of a biological or gestational relation. Such a view, he argues, is consistent with existing case law on the constitutional rights to procreation and privacy and supported by moral theory and modern scientific evidence.
