Also known as: parent-child · parent and child relationship · parent-child relationship · parent-child doctrine · filial relationship
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
A legal status connecting an individual to a child that determines rights to inheritance, custody, and support. The status arises by birth, formal adoption, or de facto parentage and extends equally to every child and parent without regard to the marital status of the parents.
Paige Porter gave birth to a daughter while unmarried. After Paige died without a will, her daughter claimed the estate under intestate succession. The court recognized the full parent-child relationship because the status extends equally regardless of marital status, allowing the daughter to inherit as a descendant.
Priscilla Parks's twelve-year-old son threw a rock that injured a neighbor. The neighbor sued Priscilla solely because she was the boy's mother. The court dismissed the claim because the parent-child relationship alone does not impose vicarious liability. Liability requires the parent's own negligent supervision or entrustment.
Pamela Phillips formally adopted her stepdaughter after marrying the child's mother. When Pamela later died intestate, the stepdaughter claimed a share of the estate as a child. The court held that the adoption created a full parent-child relationship, placing the adoptee in the same position as a biological child for inheritance purposes.
Phoebe Park lived with and raised her partner's biological child for six years, providing daily care and holding the child out as her own. After the partner died, Phoebe sought recognition as a parent for custody and support. The court found a parent-child relationship based on de facto parentage arising from the functional parental role.
Pavel Petrov's will attempted to redirect pension benefits away from his former spouse and their child. The surviving spouse challenged the attempt in federal court. The court declined to override the state-law parent-child relationship, noting that domestic relations of parent and child belong to state law rather than federal pension rules.
Isaac Boggs began working for South Central Bell in 1949 and remained employed until his retirement in 1985. He was married to Dorothy Boggs from 1949 until her death in 1979, and the couple had three sons. After Dorothy died, Isaac married Sandra Boggs in 1980, and they remained married until Isaac's death in 1989. Upon retirement, Isaac received a lump-sum distribution of $151,628.94 from the Bell System Savings Plan, which he rolled over into an Individual Retirement Account worth $180,778.05 at his death. He also received 96 shares of AT&T stock from the Bell South Employee Stock Ownership Plan and a monthly annuity of $1,777.67 from the Bell South Service Retirement Program. Dorothy's will bequeathed one-third of her estate to Isaac outright along with a lifetime usufruct in the remaining two-thirds, with naked ownership passing to the sons. A 1980 Louisiana judgment of possession ascribed to Dorothy's estate a community property interest in Isaac's Savings Plan account valued at $21,194.29. After Isaac's death, Sandra began receiving a survivor annuity and other benefits. The sons filed suit in Louisiana state court claiming a portion of the retirement benefits under Dorothy's will and Louisiana community property law. Sandra then filed a declaratory judgment action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana asserting that ERISA preempts the sons' claims. The District Court granted summary judgment against Sandra. The Fifth Circuit affirmed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.
View casePearl Porter died before her child was born through posthumous conception under a surrogacy agreement. The child sought Social Security survivor benefits as a descendant. The Court required proof that the deceased parent would have acknowledged the child under state law governing the parent-child relationship before granting benefits.
Karen Capato married Robert Capato in May 1999. Shortly thereafter, Robert was diagnosed with esophageal cancer and was told that the chemotherapy he required might render him sterile. Because the couple wanted children, Robert deposited his semen in a sperm bank before undergoing chemotherapy. Despite Robert's treatment, Karen conceived naturally and gave birth to a son in August 2001. Robert's health deteriorated in late 2001, and he died in Florida in March 2002. His will, executed in Florida, named as beneficiaries the son born of his marriage to Karen and two children from a previous marriage, but made no provision for children conceived after his death. Shortly after Robert's death, Karen began in vitro fertilization using her husband's frozen sperm. She conceived in January 2003 and gave birth to twins in September 2003, eighteen months after Robert's death. Karen Capato claimed survivors insurance benefits on behalf of the twins. The Social Security Administration denied her application. The U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey affirmed the agency's decision. The court determined that the twins would qualify for benefits only if they could inherit from the deceased wage earner under Florida intestacy law. Under Florida law, a child born posthumously may inherit only if conceived during the decedent's lifetime. The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit reversed. It concluded that the undisputed biological children of a deceased wage earner and his widow qualify for survivors benefits without regard to state intestacy law. Courts of Appeals had divided on the question, with some circuits reaching conflicting results. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve the conflict.
View caseNo. The relationship alone does not impose vicarious liability. A parent is liable only when the parent's own negligence, such as negligent supervision, proximately causes the child's tortious conduct.
Supporting sources
The relationship extends equally to every child and parent regardless of marital status. It also arises through formal adoption or de facto parentage under the applicable uniform acts.
Supporting sources
Yes. Abolition of immunity removes the relationship-based defense but does not create liability where the conduct would otherwise be privileged or non-tortious under ordinary negligence principles.
Supporting sources
No. An intended parent must also function as a parent within a reasonable time after birth. The surrogate is almost never treated as a legal parent under class-gift rules.
Supporting sources
…transfers of pension plan benefits. As a general matter, "[t]he whole subject of the domestic relations of husband and wife, parent and child, belongs to the laws of the States and not to the laws of the United States." In re Burrus , 136 U. S. 586, 593-594 (1890). Support obligations, in particular, are "deeply rooted moral…