Warring Attorneys Make Baby Boy Johnson a Media Star

SANTA ANA —  Four days after his birth, Baby Boy Johnson is a media sensation, and his attorneys warned Friday that the ensuing publicity could mark him for life.

“The child’s right to privacy has been compromised by this three-ring circus,” said William G. Steiner, the guardian appointed by the court to represent the baby during the custody battle between his genetic parents and the surrogate mother they hired for $10,000.

The battle over Baby Boy Johnson has now been chronicled by CBS News, Time and Newsweek magazines, the Washington Post, USA Today and scores of others.

It has also been featured on Phil Donahue’s and Geraldo Rivera’s shows, prompted calls from the producers for Sally Jesse Raphael and Oprah Winfrey, and earned a page-and-a-half spread in the National Enquirer.

The outcome of the Johnson case is expected to set legal precedent as the first custody case involving the surrogate mother of a “test-tube” baby, to whom she has no apparent genetic link.

Media interest in Baby Boy Johnson has not reached the epic proportions of the landmark Baby M case, when about 100 reporters jammed a New Jersey courtroom to hear the verdict, according to one veteran.

Nevertheless, the clash of instinct, law and biotechnology drew nearly three dozen reporters, producers and photographers Friday to Orange County Superior Court.

“In some ways, this is more interesting (than the Baby M case) because it’s a more daring assertion by the surrogate mother in making a claim to the child,” said Martin Kasindorf, Los Angeles reporter for New York-based Newsday. “Legally, it was unprecedented. It poses the question: What is parenting, anyway?”

But other reporters predicted that national interest in the story would soon fade.

“It’s a good, interesting, compelling story--and you do it once,” said a correspondent for ABC who declined to be named.

Outside the courtroom, camera crews from CBS, NBC, ABC and CNN jockeyed with local TV reporters for the best angles and jostled print reporters aside with a ferocity usually reserved for Zsa Zsa Gabor or presidential campaigns.

Similar maneuvers were conducted by attorneys for the various contenders. One by one, they emerged from the courtroom to confront the bank of cameras, each offering a slightly different interpretation of the day’s legal events.

The baby’s attorney said Friday that the media war conducted by the attorneys had led some to make “untrue and inconsistent” statements that were further confusing an already-complicated case.

“When you have lawyers more interested in publicity than in this child, it’s absolutely unforgivable,” attorney Harold LaFlamme said. “The one thing that surprises me right now is that they haven’t sold tickets.”

Superior Judge Richard N. Parslow told reporters that he would allow attorneys to work out procedural questions off camera, in his chambers.

“Given what I’ve seen so far in this week, I get a more candid response from the lawyers when they’re with me in chambers than when it’s a press conference-type atmosphere,” Parslow said.

The judge said he would allow print reporters inside the courtroom but would limit the access of TV and still cameras.

“I need to concentrate in this case on what’s going on,” Parslow said, “and I can’t have a din, either in here or out in the hallway. . . . A whole bunch of TV cameras would create a problem.”

Advocates of the baby said they worried that the sensational aspects of the case could come back to haunt the child years after he is grown. “As children grow up, they want to know their roots, strengthen their sense of identity, their sense of belonging,” Steiner said. “This child’s sense of identity and belonging have been compromised.”

These concerns were echoed by Ben Bagdikian, professor emeritus of the UC Berkeley School of Journalism, who said the press should cover the case “with sensitivity and respect and with a maximum of serious information.”

“There’s no question that publicity of any kind is going to dog this kid,” he said. “But with sensationalist treatment of it, the kid will be seen as a freak instead of a human being who is put in this bizarre position.”

Dr. Justin D. Call, a child psychiatrist who may be called as an expert witness in the trial, said the effect on the child is unpredictable and depends largely on the attitude, skills and maturity of his parents.

“It all depends on the breaks, so to speak, and the maturity of the child and the circumstances under which they learn the information,” he said, adding that surrogacy may not be as unusual by the time Baby Boy Johnson is old enough to understand the facts of his complicated life.

“We are living in an age when science is moving ahead rapidly, and we may be in for even greater surprises in the future,” Call said.

Times staff writers Gebe Martinez and Catherine Gewertz contributed to this story.