Newland, Fleming Still Waiting To See Children

OKLAHOMA CITY — Rebekkah Newland and Jennifer Fleming continue to wait.

Halloween is over. Thanksgiving is past.

And, with just 8 days until Christmas, both women are being forced to continue a yearlong custody fight to see their children.

Part of a trio of non-biological mothers in same-sex relationships who are waging a court battle to see their children, Newland and Fleming thought a unanimous ruling handed down in November by the Oklahoma Supreme Court would buttress their efforts.

That ruling, on behalf of Charlene Ramey, helped pave the way for Ramey to see her son. Ramey was the non-biological mother of a child in a same-sex relationship. Ramey was prevented from seeing her child for more than year by the biological mother, Kimberly Sutton.

Ramey had sought a custody hearing in Oklahoma County District Court. An Oklahoma County district judge threw out Ramey’s request. The ACLU of Oklahoma filed a appeal with the Oklahoma Supreme Court, asking the state’s high court to overturn the dismissal and give Ramey her day in court. Since then, a temporary order has allowed Ramey visitation of her son.

In November, the Oklahoma Supreme Court agreed. The court overturned the district court’s decision. In the court’s opinion, Justice Joseph Watt said Ramey was not a mere ‘third party’ like a nanny, friend or relative, as suggested by the district court.

“On the contrary, Ramey has been intimately involved in the conception, birth and parenting of their child, at the request and invitation of Sutton,” Watt wrote. “Ramey has stood in the most sacred role as parent to their child and always has been referred to as ‘mom’ by their child. The community, school, medical providers and extended family have all known Ramey as ‘the other parent’ all with the knowledge and mutual agreement of Sutton.”

Newland and Fleming faced the same problem. However, the Oklahoma Supreme Court hasn’t issued a ruling in either case. Like Ramey, Newland and Fleming haven’t seen their children in more than a year.

“It’s not just me,” Rebekkah Newland said. “His entire family is waiting. An entire family has been taken from him. I don’t know what to do for his birthday or Christmas. I'm lost. He still has unopened Christmas presents from last year sitting on his bed.”

The story is the same for Jennifer Fleming. She, too, has been prevented from seeing her child, a daughter.

“You would think in time it would get easier,” Fleming said. “But it doesn’t. I have missed three birthdays and now a third Christmas. This isn't fair. Ask yourself how you would feel if your spouse or partner took your child and said you will never see them again after you decided together to have this child. It’s devastating.”

Each day, she said, she puts a smile on her face believing that something will change.

For both women, the wait continues.

Attorneys for Laura Taylor, Newland’s ex-partner and for Whitney Rachael Hyde, Fleming’s ex-partner, have both filed briefs asking the court to deny any move that would allow Newland or Fleming access to their children.

“…Oklahoma law make(s) it clear that Fleming is not entitled to parental status, custody or visitation,” wrote attorney William Liebel in a brief filed Dec. 10.

Attorneys for Rebekkah Newland’s ex-spouse, Laura Taylor, filed a similar response. “The fact in Newland’s case were different than those in Ramey because Newland has no ‘biological or contractual connection with the child,” the brief said.

Brady Henderson, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Oklahoma, said the Ramey ruling does apply to Fleming and Newland’s case.

“While each of these families are unique, the core issues remain the same for the court,” he said. “That’s why we believe the Ramey decision should apply to these cases, too.”

The court’s ruling in the Ramey case, he said, was a terrific first step but Henderson said more has to be done.

“There are more parents out there who can’t see their children,” he said. “And we must keep fighting to change that.”