David Tutera Divorce

[Hillbeans]

I have just started following this story - it raises a lot of questions as to why they went through surrogacy during the midst of a divorce?:

David Tutera took to The View on Sept. 13 to explain the divorce process he is going through — and how it will affect his two newborn children. David is seeking custody of his daughter Cielo while his ex, Ryan Juirca, wants custody of their son Cedric. The tricky situation is that the children are not biologically fully brother and sister, even though they were born as fraternal twins via surrogate in July 2013.


David Tutera Divorce — ‘Protecting’ Daughter Is Top Priority
David clarified that in his surrogacy process, two embryos were fertilized and implanted into the same surrogate, resulting in one child, daughter Cielo, being biologically David’s while son Cedric is biologically Ryan’s.

“They are not biologically full brother and sister,” he explained.

David said that his top priorities have become being able to “get through a divorce, care for, and nurture my daughter.”

He also insisted that his intentions are not to keep the kids away from each other, but that he is working to get to a place where there can be harmony. Both David and Ryan agree that the twins should stay in each others’ lives, each stressing in multiple interviews that it is not “fair” or “their place” to keep the children away from one another because of the couple’s issues.

“It would be so unfair of me if I were to say Cielo can’t see her brother because of what happened between Ryan and me,” David told People.

David Tutera & Ryan Jurica’s Divorce
David and Ryan have been going through the third year of a process to end their 10 year domestic partnership. David is separating the divorce from the struggle to gain custody of his daughter.

The pair “filed for divorce before the children were born,” David told the ladies of The View.

“The relationship has been going horribly for 6 years,” David said. “We were hoping that having a family would make it better.”

 

[Lorelei Lee]

It sounds like a real-life "Parent Trap". I never did like the concept of that movie. For the children's sake, I hope that David and Ryan can come to terms so that Cielo and Cedric can have a relationship.

 

[wiigirl]

It sounds like a real-life "Parent Trap". I never did like the concept of that movie. For the children's sake, I hope that David and Ryan can come to terms so that Cielo and Cedric can have a relationship.

Me too...

 

[superme80]

Very sad. You should never have children to "save" your relationship.

 

[mamacatnv]

The babies came from the same female, is that correct?
That would make them biologically related - what the heck is the term "not biologically fully brother and sister". (I understand they are probably 1/2 siblings) but the term caught me off guard)

 

[pryncess527]

“The relationship has been going horribly for 6 years,” David said. “We were hoping that having a family would make it better.”

Seriously??? I thought everyone knew by now this was a horrible idea. I get doing it subconsiocusly, but to make the conscious choice to go through surrogacy to improve the relationship seems insane.

And I get that the kids are newborn, and it's nice they want them to have a sibling relationship, but I can't fathom asking for custody of only one child because only one child is genetically mine. I'd expect to share custody of both children, just like many other couples with multiple children who divorced would.

 

[Lorelei Lee]

Seriously??? I thought everyone knew by now this was a horrible idea. I get doing it subconsiocusly, but to make the conscious choice to go through surrogacy to improve the relationship seems insane.

And I get that the kids are newborn, and it's nice they want them to have a sibling relationship, but I can't fathom asking for custody of only one child because only one child is genetically mine. I'd expect to share custody of both children, just like many other couples with multiple children who divorced would.

Yes, but this situation makes for very interesting, Solomon-like legal questions. there's no "good" solution here, but avoiding a court battle is probably a much better idea.

 

[KathyTX]

The babies came from the same female, is that correct?
That would make them biologically related - what the heck is the term "not biologically fully brother and sister". (I understand they are probably 1/2 siblings) but the term caught me off guard)

One woman carried both fertilized embryos, but the eggs were not hers.

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

One woman carried both fertilized embryos, but the eggs were not hers.

Then why are they specifying "not fully biological" rather than "not biologically related at all"? Isn't a woman who carries a child or children called something like a gestational carrier? I get the impression from the article that they are biologically 1/2 siblings.

 

[Lorelei Lee]

If I understand correctly, one woman donated the eggs and another woman carried the twins.

 

[bdcp]

I'm disgusted by the entire story. Those poor children. They are the only victims here and this will affect them for life. What selfish human beings.

 

[lisaviolet]

That's very sad.

One of my friend's parents did that. Not twins. But mother took the daughter and father took the son. And to different countries - Canada/US

Wow, I hate to see siblings separated.

 

[NotUrsula]

Honestly, as they are infants and are apparently not blood siblings, I really don't see that it would be truly tragic to separate them, but I think that if they do so, then it should be permanent.

Better under the circumstances for each of them to take his own child and start fresh, because having them in one anothers lives would make explaining the separation of a couple of children who were (for want of a better term) womb-mates will be an ongoing psychological struggle. I think that in the long run, it would be preferable to just be a kid with a single Dad who loves you, rather than a kid whose other parent only wanted the kid who was biologically his.

 

[Lorelei Lee]

Honestly, as they are infants and are apparently not blood siblings, I really don't see that it would be truly tragic to separate them, but I think that if they do so, then it should be permanent.

Better under the circumstances for each of them to take his own child and start fresh, because having them in one anothers lives would make explaining the separation of a couple of children who were (for want of a better term) womb-mates will be an ongoing psychological struggle. I think that in the long run, it would be preferable to just be a kid with a single Dad who loves you, rather than a kid whose other parent only wanted the kid who was biologically his.

But they ARE blood siblings. Biologically they have different fathers but the same mother.

 

[lisaviolet]

Honestly, as they are infants and are apparently not blood siblings, I really don't see that it would be truly tragic to separate them, but I think that if they do so, then it should be permanent.

Better under the circumstances for each of them to take his own child and start fresh, because having them in one anothers lives would make explaining the separation of a couple of children who were (for want of a better term) womb-mates will be an ongoing psychological struggle. I think that in the long run, it would be preferable to just be a kid with a single Dad who loves you, rather than a kid whose other parent only wanted the kid who was biologically his.

NotUrsula, thanks for another perspective. It made me think. You may be right. Hard all around.

 

[KathyTX]

If I understand correctly, one woman donated the eggs and another woman carried the twins.

That's what it sounds like to me.

 

[pryncess527]

Honestly, as they are infants and are apparently not blood siblings, I really don't see that it would be truly tragic to separate them, but I think that if they do so, then it should be permanent.

Better under the circumstances for each of them to take his own child and start fresh, because having them in one anothers lives would make explaining the separation of a couple of children who were (for want of a better term) womb-mates will be an ongoing psychological struggle. I think that in the long run, it would be preferable to just be a kid with a single Dad who loves you, rather than a kid whose other parent only wanted the kid who was biologically his.

Under the circumstances, you may be right. I just can't fathom turning my back on a child I chose to create simply because they did not carry my DNA. But since they knew they were having problems when they made the surrogacy choice, some part of them may have always suspected it would come to this.

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

If I understand correctly, one woman donated the eggs and another woman carried the twins.

Which has nothing to do with anything then. The question was...are they or are they not biologically related. If the eggs are from the same woman, then it really doesn't matter who carried them...they would still be biologically related.

Where the info is coming from about how many women were involved in the process, I'm just not seeing that in the OP. It seems to me that the surrogate used her eggs, which were fertilized by David and his spouse.

I don't think the situation is as dire or awful as everyone seems to think. There are many children out in the world these days who are born as the result of surrogates and sperm donors, who don't have relationships.

 

[jrmasm]

They are half siblings according to the New York Daily News.

Eta: maybe not. They shared the same surrogate.

This is very confusing!

Tmz says the eggs were donated by the same woman. So that would make them half siblings.

 

[mamacatnv]

If I understand correctly, one woman donated the eggs and another woman carried the twins.

They are half siblings according to the New York Daily News.

Eta: maybe not. They shared the same surrogate.

This is very confusing!

Tmz says the eggs were donated by the same woman. So that would make them half siblings.

I guess the new term for half siblings is not fully biologically related.

This puts a whole new spin on same sex surrogacy - what if one of the partners DNA did not fertilize either of the eggs, would he have then been off the hook for custody & support or vice versa, could it be used against him to take the child away?

I know people who did this, they combined sperm to fertilize the embryos, they "didn't want to know" who the "real father" was.......well that is until their relationship went sour and they were the parents of triplets, one wanted custody and support from the other who claimed they "might not be mine" since they mixed the sperm, DNA will have to be the judge.