Mother and her husband, a transgender male, wanted a child and after discussions with father regarding the future roles of the parties, father impregnated mother and mother gave birth to father's biological child. The parties disputed the role father was to play in child's life, mother refused father's requests to see child and father filed a complaint for custody. Mother objected, arguing that father lacked standing under 23 Pa.C.S.A. §5324 because, pursuant to the parties' text-message sperm-donor contract, he was merely a sperm donor and sperm donors did not have standing to seek custody. The trial court granted father provisional standing and mother filed a petition for declaratory judgment asking the court to declare that a contract existed between the parties and to enforce the contract with respect to father's interest in and standing in any custody action. The trial court denied mother's petition for declaratory judgment, found that no sperm-donation contract existed between the parties and that since father was the biological father, he had standing to seek custody. Mother appealed.