Sperm donor to lesbian couple ordered to pay child support.

[Vegitto]

IMO, sex = paying, and contact more than once = paying.

 

[LeiZaK]

Originally posted by: CKent

Originally posted by: LeiZaK
I would like to make a "donation" for a lesbian couple. Where do I sign up? 😀

If you ever see a real lesbian couple you're more likely to donate whatever's in your stomach at the time :laugh:

They do come in a variety of flavors. Granted, most are quite wretched. Obviously I was talking about the non-wretched type.

 

[Canun]

Originally posted by: AnyMal

Originally posted by: Agentbolt
Usually I'm first in line to complain about how messed up Family Law is in this country, but this case isn't quite as open and shut as it sounds. The sperm donor/Dad had contact with the kids, bought them stuff, etc. He ceased becoming "just" a sperm donor pretty quickly. If he'd donated the sperm then never had contact with any of them ever again, obviously that'd be completely different.

I'm not sure it's fair to want to be a Dad for the easy stuff but then brush everything off as soon as money is involved. You can't pick and choose which parts of the Dad stuff you want to do.

Exactly. The guy wasn't just a "sperm donor". Whether he intended for it to happen or not, but he became a father figure to those kids, thus assuming partial responsibility for their welfare.

That doesn't make any sense. What if the neighbor next door takes up the reigns of a missing father? Being a sperm donor means that you are donating to help other people have children. The emphasis being other children. If it comes down to genetics, then what keeps your kindly uncle from being charged with child support if your father died? Very bad precedent.

The two people in the relationship decided to have children, their decision, their responsibility.

 

[Vegitto]

Oh, what about a contract? The father of a friend of mine donates on a personal basis.. He accepts childless couples (straight or lesbian) and gives them the stuff in his bathroom (in a cup, and he's not there when they do it.. 😛).. He has a contract they sign before getting the sperm saying he cannot be held responsible for child support. Would this hold in a courtroom? He doesn't use a notary or anything else.

 

[Dacalo]

Read the damn article people.

Change the topic, it's misleading.

 

[OutHouse]

LOL owned.

 

[Gooberlx2]

Wow...I think there was a thread posted some time ago about this case when it first started. I can't believe they ruled that way...it bodes very poorly for future non-anonymous donors and other things like surrogate mothers, etc...

edit: Oh so he had contact with the kid....this isn't the same case I was thinking of earlier. I still think it's a bad decision.

 

[silverpig]

Originally posted by: Vegitto
Oh, what about a contract? The father of a friend of mine donates on a personal basis.. He accepts childless couples (straight or lesbian) and gives them the stuff in his bathroom (in a cup, and he's not there when they do it.. 😛).. He has a contract they sign before getting the sperm saying he cannot be held responsible for child support. Would this hold in a courtroom? He doesn't use a notary or anything else.

Sounds like the type of contract a couple of 4th graders would come up with so probably not. But then again, I know next to nothing about law, so...

 

[OutHouse]

why do they keep calling him a sperm doner? it says the process was informal and was done at home. what did he do spunk in a mason jar and use a turkey baster? or did he f*ck them?

im leaning towards that he f*cked them.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: Roguestar

Originally posted by: alrocky

The process was very informal ? Jacob was inseminated at home.

That was his first mistake.

I bet the "home insemination" of a lesbian couple isn't a job many get to do...

Is that supposed to be some kind of euphemism? i'm still scratching my head.

 

[RaiderJ]

Things on my not-to-do list:
Donate sperm to lesbian couple

 

[jadinolf]

Looks like I'm in trouble.🙁

 

[AnyMal]

Originally posted by: Canun

Originally posted by: AnyMal

Originally posted by: Agentbolt
Usually I'm first in line to complain about how messed up Family Law is in this country, but this case isn't quite as open and shut as it sounds. The sperm donor/Dad had contact with the kids, bought them stuff, etc. He ceased becoming "just" a sperm donor pretty quickly. If he'd donated the sperm then never had contact with any of them ever again, obviously that'd be completely different.

I'm not sure it's fair to want to be a Dad for the easy stuff but then brush everything off as soon as money is involved. You can't pick and choose which parts of the Dad stuff you want to do.

Exactly. The guy wasn't just a "sperm donor". Whether he intended for it to happen or not, but he became a father figure to those kids, thus assuming partial responsibility for their welfare.

That doesn't make any sense. What if the neighbor next door takes up the reigns of a missing father? Being a sperm donor means that you are donating to help other people have children. The emphasis being other children. If it comes down to genetics, then what keeps your kindly uncle from being charged with child support if your father died? Very bad precedent.

The two people in the relationship decided to have children, their decision, their responsibility.

Well, you're comparing apples on oranges here. You're thinking of a situation where a blood relative may be forced to assume parental duties which has never happened (to my knowledge) and hopefully will not happen any time soon. In the situation described in the article the man was not only a sperm donor, he became a bona fide father figure by letting children know he's their biological father and at least partially assuming parental responsibilities.