Non-Golden Globes Countdown: Juno (Part Two)
If this is your first day at Popsquire, then you need to catch up on Popsquire’s countdown to the non-Golden Globes. Each day, Popsquire examines how a nominated film collides with the law. You can read past discussions here and aqui.
Today’s pick is Juno, again. I can’t help it. Juno is a great movie with many legal collisions! In the scene where Juno is exploring adoption with the potential adoptive parents, Jennifer Garner’s character asks if Juno is seeking any “other compensation.” Juno says “No.”
Popsquire’s perspective…
Generally, it is both legal and customary to pay for certain expenses incurred by a birth mother, with various limitations and conditions.
For example, California law provides in Penal Code § 273, that it is legal to assist with a birth mother’s reasonable and necessary pregnancy-related living expenses, for the period of time that she is disabled or unemployable due to the pregnancy.
This payment of expenses must be made unconditionally and as an act of charity — otherwise, it could be considered buying the baby.
If Popsquire were adopting, he’d definitely prefer a birth mother birth mother who lives modestly! Just like Notorious B.I.G. said, Mo’ Money Mo’ Problems.
