The contract was plain. By donating sperm to Jennifer Schreiner and Angela Bauer – a lesbian couple seeking to conceive – sperm donor William Marotta was supposed to “not be considered the father of the child nor liable for child support.”
Yet when Jennifer and Angela broke up three years later, and the cash-strapped former couple began seeking financial aid from the state, it was their daughter’s biological father who the Department for Children and Families went after for child support payments.
According to the state, Marotta should be legally liable for child support because his sperm donation did not go through an officially licensed state fertility physician, as required by Kansas law. Because he didn’t go through “the system”, the state’s lawyers argue, he should not be protected by it.
It’s a thorny issue – especially since as recently as 2007 the same courts ruled that a sperm donor had no legal rights to children produced from his sperm unless they were laid out beforehand in an agreement with the child’s mother.
But apparently, according to those looking for the money, you can opt into parental responsibilities as a sperm donor, but not opt out.
What do you think of this development?
Yet when Jennifer and Angela broke up three years later, and the cash-strapped former couple began seeking financial aid from the state, it was their daughter’s biological father who the Department for Children and Families went after for child support payments.
According to the state, Marotta should be legally liable for child support because his sperm donation did not go through an officially licensed state fertility physician, as required by Kansas law. Because he didn’t go through “the system”, the state’s lawyers argue, he should not be protected by it.
It’s a thorny issue – especially since as recently as 2007 the same courts ruled that a sperm donor had no legal rights to children produced from his sperm unless they were laid out beforehand in an agreement with the child’s mother.
But apparently, according to those looking for the money, you can opt into parental responsibilities as a sperm donor, but not opt out.
What do you think of this development?
I think that if they had a written contract made up, whether they went through a standard system or not, that stated the sperm donor was not to be held responsible for any child support, then he shouldn't be held responsible for child support. If the original situation was as simple as that, then he should have nothing at all to do with the child. It's unfortunate that the woman in question is low on money, but she shouldn't be trying to prey on the man who donated his sperm.
Wow, how sexist and stupid is that? e_e
I really cant believe they actually got there way. Key word DONATE!!!!!!
this is so wrong on so many levels!