In a ruling that shocked GLBT activists, a Cook County Judge ruled last week that although he and his son 'have a good and loving
relationship,' a transgender father named Sterling will not be granted custody of his 10-year-old son.
Judge Gerald Bender said although the man has been a good father, his previous marriage to the child's mother is invalid
because he was a woman at birthsame-sex marriages are illegal in Illinois.
The child's public guardian, the nationally known and respected child advocate Patrick Murphy, disagreed with the ruling and
says he will appeal.
This ruling was opposite that of a Florida Judge just two months ago when transgender father Michael Kantares was granted
primary custody of his two children.
In addition, Illinois has had several progressive rulings on gay and lesbian parenting, including adoption. Even though the
marriage was ruled not valid, there is some precedent on same-sex parenting issues.
The Chicago Tribune reported that the judge did rule that because the boy has established a bond with his father, there will still
be visitation.
Guardian Patrick Murphy said the boy, who currently lives with his mother, wants to live with his father.
'I know everyone waited a long time for this day,' Judge Bender said. 'It certainly is unique in the law in Illinois.' There had been
three weeks of testimony, off and on, since September.
Susan Goreczny, Sterling's lawyer, left without comment, and the father was not in the courtroom.
'It's up to the legislature, and I agree, to say that transgender couples can marry or not marry, and I think the judge is right on that,'
the Tribune reported Murphy as saying after the trial. 'In this case, though, two people, two adults, had a child through artificial
insemination, signed a contract to raise him as their child. And my client, the kid who's almost 11 years old, relied upon that. And
because the mom and dad held themselves out as parents, he has a relationship with the alleged father, treats him as a father, loves
him as a father and I think it's unconstitutional to cut off that relationship after 11 years.'
The couple married Aug. 10, 1985. Sterling started taking male hormones in the late 1970s, and he did not disclose this until after
the ceremony. The groom had a complete hysterectomy but no further surgery. They conceived through artificial insemination. The
couple is listed on the artificial insemination agreement and the birth certificate. The mother did stay with Sterling for several years
after she knew his storymaking them more like a same-sex couple raising a child.
As long as female genitalia remained, the transformation 'was not complete,' according to Bender. 'There is no marriage to
dissolve.' Would he have ruled differently if Sterling had completed the surgery? That is a huge legal unknown.