Sperm Donor Ordered to Pay Child Support by Kansas Judge.

[DennisBreene]

http://news.msn.com/us/judge-rules-kan-sperm-donor-owes-child-support

TOPEKA, Kan. — A man who provided sperm to a lesbian couple in response to an online ad is the father of a child born to one of the women and must pay child support, a Kansas judge ruled Wednesday.
Topeka resident William Marotta had argued that he had waived his parental rights and didn't intend to be a father. Shawnee County District Court Judge Mary Mattivi rejected that claim, saying the parties didn't involve a licensed physician in the artificial insemination process and thus Marotta didn't qualify as a sperm donor, The Topeka Capital-Journal reported.

I guess the take home message is don't do any favors without a damn good attorney.

 

[punisher73]

Working in Corrections/LE for the past 17 years, I have seen some CRAZY decisions regarding the courts trying to get ANYONE to pay for child support. If the courts operated the same way in criminal proceedings, there would be a mass outcry about violation of basic rights.

I have seen wives cheat on their husbands and the husband divorces the wife and then the wife has the baby of the man she cheated with and the courts order the ex-husband to pay for the child because he had a job and money. Huh?

I have seen men listed as the "father" in a child suit and never knew so they couldn't contest it and then even prove through DNA that they weren't the father and the courts still hold them liable for the back support because it was a "legal order at the time" and they should have fought it back then (even though they never knew they were named as the father).

These are just a couple that I can recall. It really is a shame with what the courts do in many cases like this. I remember reading the story when it first came out and the lesbian couple BOTH signed off on holding this man responsible for ANY financial responsibility. Then one of them lost their job and they needed money and this is what happened. The courts found a loophole about the "physician" part to hold this guy responsible. A shame that the courts are ruining this guys life just to get money out of him.

 

[granfire]

http://news.msn.com/us/judge-rules-kan-sperm-donor-owes-child-support



I guess the take home message is don't do any favors without a damn good attorney.

In this case 'without middle man'

But then again...if there is a way for government to deny claims and draw money from other pockets....there you go!

It really stinks.

 

[oftheherd1]

In this case 'without middle man'

But then again...if there is a way for government to deny claims and draw money from other pockets....there you go!

It really stinks.

My first question would be how the artificial insemination took place without the assistance of a doctor? Then I would wonder what wonderful legal morass we are going to conjure up if marriage becomes the law of the USA? You can't make this stuff up.

 

[granfire]

My first question would be how the artificial insemination took place without the assistance of a doctor? Then I would wonder what wonderful legal morass we are going to conjure up if marriage becomes the law of the USA? You can't make this stuff up.

I think 'Turkey Baster' comes to mind....(asking for specifics would be impolite and intrusive....)

But it certainly shows you that the legal system picks and chooses as to what they follow....as long as they don't have to shell out money.
I mean, either 'marriage' or committed relationship or what have you is binding in terms of child support, or biological lineage....how come they get to have it both ways?

 

[Steve]

This is one of those things where the devil is in the details. I'd say each situation like this is case by case whether I personally think there's merit to the claim or not.

In this specific case, it sounds like it's one word against the other. I have friends in the same situation, but they went through a sperm bank, under the care of an actual doctor. I don't think it was very expensive, but it was safe and protected both their privacy and the privacy of the donor.

Ultimately, it matters what might happen if the tables were turned. Would there be a case if this guy chose to exercise his rights as the biological father? What would happen if, during the pregnancy or after, this guy filed a suit for joint custody of his biological offspring?

in the case of a sperm donor at a reputable sperm bank, it would be pretty clear. In this case? Not so much.

 

[PhotonGuy]

This is why you have to make sure to cover all your bases before you decide to be a sperm donor, or do anything else that could have extremely unwanted consequences.

 

[punisher73]

This is one of those things where the devil is in the details. I'd say each situation like this is case by case whether I personally think there's merit to the claim or not.

In this specific case, it sounds like it's one word against the other. I have friends in the same situation, but they went through a sperm bank, under the care of an actual doctor. I don't think it was very expensive, but it was safe and protected both their privacy and the privacy of the donor.

Ultimately, it matters what might happen if the tables were turned. Would there be a case if this guy chose to exercise his rights as the biological father? What would happen if, during the pregnancy or after, this guy filed a suit for joint custody of his biological offspring?

in the case of a sperm donor at a reputable sperm bank, it would be pretty clear. In this case? Not so much.

I don't even think it's a case of one word against another, they have a signed agreement. It wasn't until one partner lost their job and needed money that they sought money. Instead of the courts honoring the agreeement that agreement, they found the loophoole to hold him liable.

 

[Steve]

I don't even think it's a case of one word against another, they have a signed agreement. It wasn't until one partner lost their job and needed money that they sought money. Instead of the courts honoring the agreeement that agreement, they found the loophoole to hold him liable.

I don't know much more than anyone else about contract law, but common sense would seem to dictate that if you're going to voluntarily give a woman your DNA in order to create a child, and choose to do so without the benefit of anonymity, you'd want to at least run the agreement by a lawyer.

I'm not saying that this isn't crappy. But, damn... it's like when you hear about kids who get into these loosey goosey agreements with their "friends." Oh yeah, he'll give you that $5000 back, because he said he would, and you have a hand written note.

To sum up, it's kind of crappy for this guy. But really, there has to be someone in this guy's life with the common sense to say, "Dude. Have you really thought this through?"