Parham v. Hughes – Parental Rights
Parham v. Hughes, 441 U.S. 347, 99 S. Ct. 1742, 60 L. Ed. 2d 269 (1979).
NATURE OF THE CASE: This was a dispute over the ability of a father who has not legitimated a child to bring a lawsuit for the wrongful death of the child.
FACTS: Parham was the biological father of a minor child who was killed together with the child’s mother in an auto accident. Parham and the child’s mother were never married and Parham did not legitimate the child despite having the ability to do so under Georgia state law. Parham did however sign the child’s birth certificate and contribute to his support. Parham gave the child his last name and visited him regularly.
Parham brought a lawsuit to recover for wrongful death. The defendant driver of the auto filed a motion for summary judgment on the grounds that Parham was precluded under Georgia state law from recovering for his illegitimate child’s wrongful death. The trial court held that the statute violated both due process and equal protection and denied the summary judgment. The Georgia Supreme Court reversed and the United States Supreme Court granted cert.
ISSUE: If a father has not legitimated a child is it proper to deny him the right to sue for wrongful death?
RULE OF LAW: Yes. If a father has not legitimated a child it is proper to deny him the right to sue for wrongful death.
HOLDING AND DECISION (Stewart): In the absence of invidious discrimination, a court is not free under Equal Protection to substitute its judgment for the will of the people of a State as expressed in the laws passed by the elected legislature. Although the Supreme Court held on several occasions that state legislative classifications based upon illegitimacy violate the Equal Protection Clause, the Court held that in this case this rationale was not applicable to the Georgia statute.
The statute does not impose differing burdens between legitimate and illegitimate children. The statute denies the natural father the right to sue for the illegitimate child’s wrongful death. Legitimating the child would have allowed the child to inherit from the father and no one but Parham was responsible for fostering the child’s status. It is neither illogical nor unjust for society to express its condemnation of irresponsible liaisons beyond the bounds of marriage and to deny to the biological father the right to sue for wrongful death of an illegitimate son.
The Court held that the Georgia statute does not invidiously discriminate against Parham simply merely because he is of the male sex. Mothers and fathers of illegitimate children are not similarly situated. Only a father can by voluntary unilateral action make an illegitimate child legitimate. Under Georgia law a father can both establish his identity and make his illegitimate child legitimate. The statute merely distinguishes between fathers who have legitimated their children and those who have not. This classification is unlike those condemned in Reed, Frontiero, and Stanton. The statute is also rationally related to a legitimate state purpose in that it resolves spurious claims and allows certainty in the settlement of lawsuits between the parties as a prior judicial determination of fatherhood will alleviate any uncertainty whether the suit is a proper one.
Parham argues that there is no problem with establishing paternity, as there is no question in this case that he is the father. As we have determined that this classification is rationale it is constitutionally irrelevant that Parham may be able to prove his paternity in another manner. As this case only involves suit for money damages it raises no issues of Due Process as were found in Stanley.
DISPOSITION: Affirmed.