Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-t27h7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-14T10:48:18.790Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Social Security Survivors Benefits: The Effects of Reproductive Pathways and Intestacy Law on Attitudes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Jason D. Hans  and
Martie Gillen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

According to the Social Security Administration, 98% of minor children are eligible to receive survivors benefits if a working parent dies. However, the eligibility of children born, and even conceived, after a working parent dies is less clear. In recent years, the Social Security Administration has received more than 100 applications for survivors benefits filed on behalf of children conceived after a parent's death, and one such case, Astrue v. Capato, was heard by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2012. In that case, whether the child is eligible to inherit under state intestacy law was accepted as a reasonable — and is a common — approach for determining eligibility for Social Security survivors benefits. The purpose of this study is to examine attitudes concerning access to Social Security survivors benefits (hereafter referred to as survivors benefits) in the context of various reproductive pathways and varying state intestacy laws.

Type
Independent
Information
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , Volume 41 , Issue 2 , Summer 2013 , pp. 514 - 524
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Social Security Administration, Survivors Benefits (SSA Publication No. 05–20084), (2011), available at <http://www.ssa.gov/pubs/10084.pdf> (last visited May 8, 2013).+(last+visited+May+8,+2013).>Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
In re Estate of Kolacy, 753 A.2d 1257 (N.J. Super. Ct. Ch. Div. 2000).Google Scholar
Woodward v. Commissioner of Social Security, 760 N.E.2d 257 (Mass. 2002).Google Scholar
Beeler v. Astrue, 651 F.3d 954 (8th Cir. 2011).Google Scholar
Amen v. Astrue, 822 N.W.2d 419 (2012).Google Scholar
Schafer v. Astrue, 641 F.3d 49 (U.S. Court of Appeals, 4th Circuit 2011).Google Scholar
Astrue v. Capato, 132 S.Ct. 2021 (2012).Google Scholar
Gillett-Netting v. Barnhart, 371 F.3d 593 (9th Cir. Ariz. 2004).Google Scholar
Vernoff v. Astrue, 08–55049 (9th Cir. 6–17-2009).Google Scholar
Storrow, R. F., “Parenthood by Pure Intention: Assisted Reproduction and the Functional Approach to Parentage,” Hastings Law Journal 53, no. 597 (2002): 597–679.Google Scholar
Nakhuda, G. S. Wang, J. G. Sauer, M. V., “Posthumous Assisted Reproduction: A Survey of Attitudes of Couples Seeking Fertility Treatment and the Degree of Agreement between Intimate Partners,” Fertility and Sterility 96, no. 6 (2011): 1463–1466.Google Scholar
Id., at 1464.Google Scholar
Bianchi, S. M. Milkie, M. A., “Work and Family Research in the First Decade of the 21st Century,” Journal of Marriage and Family 72, no. 3 (2010): 705–725; Pew Research Center. The Decline of Marriage and Rise of New Families (2010), available at <http://www.pewsocialtrends.org> (last visited May 8, 2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doucet, A., “Dad and Baby in the First Year: Gendered Responsibilities and Embodiment,” ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 624, no. 1 (2009): 78–98; Katz-Wise, S. L. Priess, H. A. Hyde, J. S., “Gender-Role Attitudes and Behavior across the Transition to Parenthood,” Developmental Psychology 46, no. 1 (2010): 18–28; Riggs, J. M., “Mandates for Mothers and Fathers: Perceptions of Breadwinners and Care Givers,” Sex Roles 37, nos. 7–8 (1997): 565–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bittman, M. England, P. Sayer, L. C. Folbre, N. Matheson, G., “When Does Gender Trump Money? Bargaining and Time in Household Work,” American Journal of Sociology 109, no. 1 (2003): 186–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hans, J. D., “Attitudes toward Posthumous Harvesting and Reproduction,” Death Studies 32, no. 9 (2008): 837–869; Hans, J. D., “Posthumous Gamete Retrieval and Reproduction: Would the Deceased Spouse Consent?” (manuscript submitted for publication, 2013); Hans, J. D. Dooley, B., “Attitudes toward Making Babies … with a Deceased Partner's Cryopreserved Gametes,” Death Studies (in press, 2013); Hans, J. D. Frey, L., “American Attitudes in Context: Posthumous Use of Cryopreserved Gametes,” Journal of Clinical Research & Bioethics S2 (2013); see Nakhuda, et al., supra note 12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hogan, M. C. Foreman, K. J. Naghavi, M. Ahn, S. Y. Wang, M. Makela, S. M. Murray, C. J. L., “Maternal Mortality for 181 Countries, 1980–2008: A Systematic Analysis of Progress towards Millennium Development Goal 5,” The Lancet 375, no. 9726 (2010): 1609–1623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finley v. Astrue, 372 Ark. 103, 270 S.W.3d 849 (2008); but c.f., B. W. Bridges, “Statutory Misconception: The Arkansas Supreme Court's Method in Finley v. Astrue Sets New Precedent for Uncertainty,” Arkansas Law Review 63, no. 2 (2010): 419–447.Google Scholar
Dondorp, W. J. De Wert, G. M. R. W., “Fertility Preservation for Healthy Women: Ethical Aspects,” Human Reproduction 24, no. 8 (2009): 1779–1785. Gosden, R. G. Oktay, K., “Oocytes for Late Starters and Posterity: Are We on to Something Good or Bad?” Fertility and Sterility 74, no. 5 (2000): 1057–1058.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, “Fertility Preservation and Reproduction in Cancer Patients,” Fertility & Sterility 83, no. 6 (2005): 1622–1628 [hereinafter cited as Ethics Committee).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvord, V., “Some Troops Freeze Sperm before Deploying,” USA Today, January 26, 2003, available at <http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-01-26-bank-usat_x.htm> (last visited May 9, 2013). Alvord, V., “Troops Start Trend with Sperm Banks,” USA Today, January 26, 2003, available at <http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-01-26-sperm-inside_x.htm> (last visited May 9, 2013). Buckley, F., “Insurance Policy: Troops Freezing Sperm,” CNN website, January 30, 2003, available at <http://www.cnn.com/2003/HEALTH/01/30/military.fertility/> (last visited May 9, 2013).id. (Ethics Committee).+(last+visited+May+9,+2013).+Alvord,+V.,+“Troops+Start+Trend+with+Sperm+Banks,”+USA+Today,+January+26,+2003,+available+at++(last+visited+May+9,+2013).+Buckley,+F.,+“Insurance+Policy:+Troops+Freezing+Sperm,”+CNN+website,+January+30,+2003,+available+at++(last+visited+May+9,+2013).id.+(Ethics+Committee).>Google Scholar
Associated Press, “Grieving Mother Has Dead Son's Sperm Harvested,” WFAA website, August 15, 2009, available at <http://www.wfaa.com/archive/64523177.html> (last visited May 9, 2013); Conley, M., “Israeli Court Allows Family to Harvest Dead Daughter's Eggs,” ABC News, August 11, 2011, available at <http://abcnews.go.com/Health/israeli-family-permission-freeze-dead-daughters-eggs/story?id=14272156#.UYuzG-7WG1K0> (last visited May 9, 2013); Dwyer, L. A., “Dead Daddies: Issues in Postmortem Reproduction,” Rutgers Law Review 52, no. 3 (2000): 881–910; Kerr, S. M. Caplan, A. Polin, G. Smugar, S. O’Neill, K. Urowitz, S., “Postmortem Sperm Procurement,” Journal of Urology 157, no. 6 (1997): 2154–2158.Google Scholar
“Jury Still Out on When Life Begins,” New Scientist 199, no. 2680 (October 29, 2008): At 6.Google Scholar
Uniform Probate Code, 2008, available at <http://www.uniformlaws.org/shared/docs/probate%20code/upcamends_final_08.pdf> (last visited May 10, 2013).+(last+visited+May+10,+2013).>Google Scholar
Kindregan, C. P. Jr. McBrien, M., Assisted Reproductive Technology: A Lawyer's Guide to Emerging Law and Science, 2nd ed. (Chicago: American Bar Association, 2011).Google Scholar
See Storrow, , supra note 11.Google Scholar
See Astrue, , supra note 8.Google Scholar
Beeler v. Astrue, 651 F.3d 954 (8th Cir. 2011).Google Scholar
Ganong, L. H. Coleman, M., “Multiple Segment Factorial Vignette Designs,” Journal of Marriage and Family 68, no. 2 (2006): 455–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landis, J. R. Koch, G. G., “The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data,” Biometrics 33, no. 1 (1977): 159–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar