Craigslist beta donates sperm, then sued for child support
- Thread starter Quintus Curtius
- Start date
- Status
If the two lesbians "separated" or "divorced", why doesn't one sue the other for support of the child? Why the fuck is the donor getting dragged into it?
Yeah, yeah, the law says this, the law says that. But when does the state government ever intervene to protect the rights of anyone other than women, gays, and freaks? Almost never.
It goes without saying that the loser sperm donor is an idiot. But does he deserve to get stuck with 18 years of support payments when no one contemplated this outcome?
I don't think so.
Those lesbians need to "man" up and pay.
Yeah, yeah, the law says this, the law says that. But when does the state government ever intervene to protect the rights of anyone other than women, gays, and freaks? Almost never.
It goes without saying that the loser sperm donor is an idiot. But does he deserve to get stuck with 18 years of support payments when no one contemplated this outcome?
I don't think so.
Those lesbians need to "man" up and pay.
Maybe the laws are different in their state. In NJ you don't have to pay anything unless she specifically files a motion in court asking for support.
If the mother is a ward of the state or in some kind of shelter the State will step in and force her to file for support. They actually represent her in court. Don't ask me how I know :dodgy:
If the mother is a ward of the state or in some kind of shelter the State will step in and force her to file for support. They actually represent her in court. Don't ask me how I know :dodgy:
in most all jurisdictions you can't negotiate away the rights to collect or responsibility to pay child support.
the state is representing the interest of the child at this point
theoretically.
nevertheless had the guy gone through normal donation practices, he would be free and clear. in this case he didn't.
the state is representing the interest of the child at this point
theoretically.
nevertheless had the guy gone through normal donation practices, he would be free and clear. in this case he didn't.
I want to see what the kid comes out looking like.
Bad Hussar
Pelican
I'm sorry, but I have near zero sympathy for the guy. Unless he has a recognisable mental condition/retardation that would make him unable to see reality. It's little use to say they had a private contract. Any idiot can draw up a contract saying any idiotic thing they want: "Person A hereby agrees to accept that Person B will heretofore have the title of 'Lord Muck upon Toast', and Person A will act in such a way towards Person B as if Person B was a Lord." Private contracts are meaningless if they infringe upon basic rights of sentient beings.
In biological matters like this he should know that the State will act in a way that may be against his interests. Frankly, even sperm donors who donate through the proper channels should be quite nervous. There is no guarantee that a judge will not strike down some part of the donorship contract "in the interests of the child." Some years ago I believe children conceived by sperm donors went to court (either UK or USA, can't remember) to force the sperm bank to reveal the ID of their biological fathers. They won, and the sperm bank had to release the details. Wasn't a $ issue. No child support issues. Actually I completely support the courts ruling here since I consider the "right" to know ones biological parents to be a basic human right. In cases where this is known to people or organisations who could be required to disclose, the child should be able to get the info on his 18th birthday. Including adoptee's, people conceived by sperm donors and so on.
Some time back I had a friend who was considering the whole "Single Mother's by Choice" path and was on the search for a "known donor" so I know a bit about the whole mess that is desperate mid-thirties career women and their social, biological and legal challenges in having children. I still think what I expressed to her then "Any man who agree's to be your 'known donor', no matter what contract the lawyers conjure up, is a 'damn fool', and therefore would probably not be good genetic material."
In biological matters like this he should know that the State will act in a way that may be against his interests. Frankly, even sperm donors who donate through the proper channels should be quite nervous. There is no guarantee that a judge will not strike down some part of the donorship contract "in the interests of the child." Some years ago I believe children conceived by sperm donors went to court (either UK or USA, can't remember) to force the sperm bank to reveal the ID of their biological fathers. They won, and the sperm bank had to release the details. Wasn't a $ issue. No child support issues. Actually I completely support the courts ruling here since I consider the "right" to know ones biological parents to be a basic human right. In cases where this is known to people or organisations who could be required to disclose, the child should be able to get the info on his 18th birthday. Including adoptee's, people conceived by sperm donors and so on.
Some time back I had a friend who was considering the whole "Single Mother's by Choice" path and was on the search for a "known donor" so I know a bit about the whole mess that is desperate mid-thirties career women and their social, biological and legal challenges in having children. I still think what I expressed to her then "Any man who agree's to be your 'known donor', no matter what contract the lawyers conjure up, is a 'damn fool', and therefore would probably not be good genetic material."
Ah good old ugly ass Topeka women, no wonder I get shitty results on OKC and POF. Time to move.
- Status