Child pleads the right to know medical history

Does a child have equal protection under the law? Do they have the right to know the medical history of both biological parents to help ensure a healthy lifestyle? An important case exercises these questions in which Minor J, a determined Michigan youth of 17 years, seeks the identity of his birth father in order to know his genetic medical history and any predispositions to diseases.
Michigan's full disclosure adoption law requires that the medical histories of birth parents accompany the adopted child on to his or her new life. However, through a technicality, Minor J's rights apply differently. Minor J’s “parents” got divorced in 1995. In 2004, Mr. J began to doubt that the boy was his biological child, a suspicion confirmed by two separate DNA tests. Minor J asked his mother for the identity of his father. She gave another name, but three months later another DNA test determined that this man, Mr. X, was also not the biological father. Minor J, represented pro bono by nationally known family law attorney Henry Baskin of Birmingham, has filed suit against his mother. The case is now before the Michigan Court of Appeals after a Macomb County circuit judge ruled that Minor J had no legal standing to bring the suit. Michigan law ruled that since Minor J is a legitimate child, as Mr. J and Diane J were married at the time of his conception and birth, he cannot ask the courts to name another man as his father. Child support payments are no longer an issue. But something more valuable is: information, which could help Minor J or his offspring practice preventive medicine and avoid future disease.

This case gives reasonable belief to Minor J, for filing suit against his mother however the ruling of the Michigan Court of Appeals stands by its initial state law. Being that Minor J is still currently under age and that Mr. J and Diane J were married at the time of his birth, he is not entitled to question the courts to name another man as his father. Age comes with maturity and acceptance, and with that ruling I personally feel that it is a healthy way to restrict his request until he is legally 18 years of age.