Features

BOSTON — In a ruling aimed at bringing the law in line with advances in science, Massachusetts’ highest court unanimously declared Friday that a couple whose twins were born to a surrogate mother were the children’s legal parents from the moment of birth. 

The Supreme Judicial Court, in a 7-0 ruling, urged the Legislature to enact new laws to address “the medical, legal and ethical aspects” of new types of reproductive technology. 

Marla and Steven Culliton had gone to court before the twins’ July 23 birth, asking that their names be put on the original birth certificates. A Family Court judge refused to allow it, but ordered that the birth certificates be left blank until the issue was settled. 

The high court’s decision Friday allows the Cullitons’ names to appear on the original birth certificates. 

Up to now, in Massachusetts, as in many other states, only the woman who gives birth is presumed to be the mother and can have her name on the original birth certificate. The genetic parents then have to go to court to obtain a new birth certificate with their names on it. They sometimes need to adopt their own child. 

But Justice John M. Greaney, writing for the court, said existing adoption laws were not written to address situations like the Cullitons’. 

The Cullitons’ lawyer, Mellisa R. Brisman, lauded the ruling as a “great victory for reproductive rights.” 

The Cullitons did not immediately return a call for comment. 

In agreeing with the Cullitons, the court noted they were the sole genetic parents of the children, that the surrogate agreed with their request, and that no one, including the hospital, contested the complaint. 

The Cullitons hired the surrogate after Ms. Cullion suffered six miscarriages. The woman was implanted with an embryo created from the couple’s sperm and egg. 

The Cullitons had asked that their names appear on the birth certificate immediately, and that they be recognized as the legal parents from the moment of birth. 

They argued that genetic parents should have the right to decide how and when to tell children about their being born to a surrogate. 

But Family and Probate Judge John Cronin questioned whether he had the authority to order such a step, and sought clarification from the high court.