[영문]This article is a critical discussion of three landmark decisions handed down by the California Supreme Court in 2005: Elisa B. v. Superior Court, K.M. v. E.G., and Kristine H. v. Lisa R. In each of these cases, the court decided that where a lesbian couple is raising dependent children born as a result of artificial insemination, the children’s biological mother and social mother are both legal parents and that in the event of the breakup of their nonmarital relationship, the lower courts should give due consideration to the social mother in decisions about child custody, visitation, and child support. The author argues that Elisa B. should have been regarded by lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender advocates as a problematic case since it was brought by the state of California under the poverty law governing the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) welfare program and therefore involved the application of TANF’s mandatory child support enforcement law. The article discusses the three cases and their most important precedents in detail and reflects on a broader set of questions revolving around the postwelfare state’s interest in using family law to enhance the private provision of economic support for all children, including the children born into nonmarital families with the assistance of reproductive technology.