Home · Guides · Last reviewed: July 2026
Definitions used on this site
- AI (artificial insemination) — conception via assisted means other than sexual intercourse (e.g., syringe/home insemination, clinical IUI). May qualify as “assisted reproduction” under modern statutes.
- NI (natural insemination) — conception via sexual intercourse. Usually ordinary parentage law, not “donation.”
Why statutes draw the line
Donor non-parentage rules were written for assisted reproduction, not for private sexual relationships relabeled after the fact. Typical statutory language (UPA 2017-style and California-style) defines assisted reproduction as a method of causing pregnancy other than sexual intercourse.
That is why this site’s status lists almost always mark NI: Not Recognized even in protective AI jurisdictions such as California and Washington.
Side-by-side risk sketch
| AI (non-intercourse) | NI (intercourse) | |
|---|---|---|
| Fits “assisted reproduction” definitions? | Often yes, if facts match | Usually no |
| Donor non-parentage statutes | May apply (plus conditions) | Usually out of scope |
| Default if no special statute | Biology + conduct still matter | Biology-forward paternity rules |
| Agreements | Stronger as intent evidence inside AR statutes | Weak against support/parentage defaults |
Limited exceptions (do not over-read)
Some Canadian provinces (map examples: Ontario, Quebec, Saskatchewan) are coded with more room for agreement-based parentage structures that can touch NI scenarios. Even there, treat sexual conception as high practical and litigation risk, and verify current provincial text with counsel.
Evidence of method
When AI is the planned path, contemporaneous records (agreement language, messages, medical notes, absence of cohabitation-as-couple narratives, etc.) can matter if parentage is later contested. Method evidence is not a substitute for meeting statutory conditions.