experimentation in the courts and, thus, leave the birth mother as the legal mother unless and until another parent adopts the child. Complex innovations like assisted reproduction are best addressed by legislatures-which can enact comprehensive, cohesive regulations, unlike courts' piecemeal decisions made through particular cases. Indeed, many jurisdictions now regulate alternative means of reproduction, eg., 750 Ill. Comp. Stat, Ann. 47 (West 2009); Tex. Fam.Code Ann. §§ 160.754-.757 (West 2008), and we have recognized the wisdom of such "formalities and protections" that safeguard not only the prospective parents but also the children that are created. See Straub v. B.M.T. by Todd, 645 N.E.2d 597, 601 (Ind.1994); cf. In re Adoption of Infants H., 904 N.E.2d 203, 207-08 (Ind.2009) (<HOLDING>). But this particular case makes it unnecessary
holding evidence insufficient to terminate mothers parental rights under section c because mother made arrangements for adequate support of children evidence showed mother left children with father who maintained steady employment and adequately supported children mother knew that father would provide adequate support and mother left children pursuant to agreed divorce decree holding evidence legally and factually sufficient under sections d and e to terminate mothers parental rights based in part on evidence that mother placed children with father who lived transient lifestyle with children holding the prospective adoptive father of surrogate children did not comply with the interstate compact on the placement of children holding wife unreasonably exposed neighbors children to danger because she invited the children over in spite of knowing her husband had molested children in the past holding fathers pleadings representing himself to be the father of the children constituted a judicial admission