Domestic Partnership of C.P. and D.F. CA4/2

BACKGROUND

C.P. and D.F, a same-sex couple living together in a committed relationship,

decided in 2003 that they wanted to raise a child together. Initially, they agreed to adopt.

They investigated foreign-country adoptions and began a year-long process toward

adoption. They went so far as to meet a prospective adoptive child and have the child

stay with them for two days. C.P. decided, however, not to go through with the adoption

because she wanted a child of her “own” and felt that she could not love a child who was

not her biological child. D.F. was “devastated,” but ultimately agreed that C.P. would

1 In addition to relying on superseded authority, C.P. states the facts in the light most favorable to her. Because both of the issues she raises are reviewed under the substantial evidence standard, we are required to view the evidence in the light most favorable to the judgment. (Charisma R. v. Kristina S. (2009) 175 Cal.App.4th 361, 368- 369, disapproved on other grounds in Reid v. Google, Inc. (2010) 50 Cal.4th 512, 532, fn. 7.) We note that we could justifiably find that by failing to discuss the evidence in accordance with the substantial evidence rule, petitioner…