The Center for Reproductive Rights hails today’s ruling by the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit as a victory for equality. This afternoon, the court ruled that a set of seven-year-old twins conceived posthumously were the legitimate children of a Tucson man under Arizona state law and therefore, were entitled to Social Security survivor benefits.

Back in 1995, the mother of the twins, Rhonda Gillett-Netting, became pregnant through in vitro fertilization after her husband, Robert Netting, died of cancer. During his brief illness, the couple decided to continue in vitro fertilization treatments, even in the advent of his death.

"We are extremely pleased with this ruling. This court has ensured that the twins will be treated equally, regardless of the circumstances of their birth," said Priscilla Smith, Center for Reproductive Rights attorney. "This couple had been desperately trying to have a baby and luckily, was able to turn to reproductive health technologies. In no way should their children be punished for the manner in which they were conceived."

Once the children, Juliet and Piers, were born, Gillett-Netting filed a claim with the Social Security Administration (SSA) for survivor benefits. She was denied the claim by SSA initially and then again by an SSA judge. The case was then brought before a district court. The court ruled against Gillett-Netting, saying that the twins did not qualify for child’s insurance benefits because they were not considered Netting’s "children" under state law. The district court judge determined that only children who survived a deceased parent or were in gestation at the time of a deceased parent’s death were eligible.

The appellate court disagreed, noting, "Because we conclude that Juliet and Piers are Netting’s legitimate children, they are considered to have been dependent under the [Social Security] Act and are entitled to benefits." Rhonda Gillett-Netting and her children are represented in Gillett-Netting v. Barnhart by Hagit Elul and Seth Rothman of Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP; and Priscilla Smith of the Center for Reproductive Rights.

Learn more about Gillett-Netting v. Barnhart.