Surrogate Launches Legal Battle And Is Fighting For The Custody Of Child After Claiming She Had An Affair With The Father
On 13th July 2021
A unique case reported in British Columbia, Canada where a surrogate who also allegedly had an affair with the father of the child is fighting a custody battle at the court. In the court documents, the surrogate claims that the father of the child promised her that if she gets pregnant the natural way then he would leave his wife and they will raise the child together as husband and wife.
In a unique case, a surrogate is fighting the custody battle of the child after carrying the child full term on the claims that she had an affair with the child's father.
According to the official court documents shared by The Daily Beast, the woman who is fighting the legal battle is originally from British Columbia, Canada, and is named K.B to protect her identity.
Credit: Pexels/Leah Kelly
Reportedly, K.B claims that she met the father of her child who had already been married to his wife for five years in 2014. She claims that their affair started soon after the marriage.
During the affair, K.B. alleges that she fell pregnant twice but she terminated each pregnancy via abortion.
Credit: Rene Asmussen/Pexels
Despite their messed-up history and the fact that they were having an affair, K.B shares that she wanted to help the father, referred to as M.S.B in court documents and so agreed to be the couple's surrogate.
However, things didn't go smoothly and after failed insemination, M.S.B requested K.B to fall pregnant naturally.
At that period they were still having an affair with M.S.B making promises with K.B that he will leave his wife for her as soon as the child comes into the world. M.S.B even made promises that they will raise the child together as a legal couple.
Credit: Pexels/Leah Kelly
However, fast forward to many years down the road, M.S.B has not left his wife and the couple is now denying K.B her visitation rights too.
Now the furious K.B is contesting this in the province’s top court, claiming she had a maternal role in the child’s life during the baby's first two years: breastfeeding her, changing diapers, and seeing her around six times per week.
However, in terms of her decision to sign an agreement to give full custody to the couple, she says that she only signed the agreement because she believed that it was necessary for her daughter to receive health insurance.
Credit: Denys Kovtun / Alamy Stock Photo
After the turnout of events this way and K.B making "progressively greater demands" such as a $100,000 payment and scheduled visits with the child, M.S.B and his wife were forced to cut contact with the surrogate.
Court documents show that presiding judge, Supreme Court Justice Warren Milman, said: "Given the highly unusual facts of this case, there is no comparable precedent driving me to any particular result on this issue."
Despite this unique situation, the judge ruled that the child needs stability and that contacting with K.B might not serve in the best interest of the child.
He concluded: "KB has not met the burden she carries to show that an order allowing her to resume contact with [the child] at this stage would be in [the child's] best interests. It follows that her application must be refused."