Cindy L. Steeb


This Article will argue that the posthumous child and the rights and responsibilities relating to such a child, are directly related to the fundamental right to procreate, thus statutes must support rather than prohibit posthumous conception. It will argue that legislation must necessarily incorporate that right in determining issues and forming legislation related to the posthumous child. It will show that current legislation, both the various Uniform Codes and Ohio's Revised Code, is not sufficient to protect and provide for this new class of children. In reaching this conclusion, Part II of this Article will review the history of artificial insemination. It will then discuss in Part III the details of posthumous reproduction, with a focus on artificial insemination using sperm from a deceased husband. In setting the stage for legislative perspective, Part IV will discuss the various analytical approaches which have been used by the courts, in the absence of clear legislation, to determine the rights associated with posthumous reproduction and the resulting child's inheritance rights. Part V considers the development of case law as the issues surrounding assisted reproduction make their way to the courts for guidance. As inheritance rights, public policy, and the support of the posthumous child are important areas of concern, Part VI will consider the implications for inheritance involving the posthumous child. Finally, this Article will review the current uniform legislation and Ohio's adoption, or lack of adoption, of these uniform acts to suggest changes addressing the realities of the posthumous child which directly confront issues relating to nonmainstream family situations.