TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) - A Kansas man who donated sperm to a lesbian couple after answering an online ad is fighting the state's efforts to suddenly force him to pay child support for the now 3-year-old girl, arguing that he and the women signed an agreement waiving all of his parental rights.
The case hinges on the fact that no doctors were used for the artificial insemination. The state argues that because William Marotta didn't work through a clinic or doctor, as required by state law, he can be held responsible for about $6,000 that the child's biological mother received through public assistance - as well as future child support.
At least 10 other states have similar requirements in their laws, including California, Illinois and Missouri, the Kansas Department of Children and Families argued in a prepared court documents it gave to The Associated Press late Wednesday
Here is my question. Two women form a partnership and agree that they want a baby. The agreement says the donor has no rights to any offpring but the teo women do.
Do you think that instead of going after the perm donor that they should go after the ex partner?
Answer by NotPanicking at 12:09 PM on Jan. 8, 2013
Answer by older at 9:38 AM on Jan. 8, 2013
I think the ex-partner should be the responsible party since they are the other parent of the offspring. I think this sets a precedent that private non-anonymous donors should draw up contracts to protect themselves from this kind of litigation. If a donor going through a medical practice has protection from having to pay support, then so should private donors. Just takes a bit of paperwork. Honestly, people should be smart enough to realize the potential damage they can do themselves when they do things like this (meaning financially as in this situation).
Answer by QuinnMae at 9:44 AM on Jan. 8, 2013
Answer by LostSoul88 at 9:43 AM on Jan. 8, 2013
Answer by baconbits at 11:07 AM on Jan. 8, 2013
Answer by KristiS11384 at 9:53 AM on Jan. 8, 2013
Answer by jerseydiva at 9:42 AM on Jan. 8, 2013
Answer by booklover545 at 9:45 AM on Jan. 8, 2013
Answer by QuinnMae at 9:54 AM on Jan. 8, 2013
But it you were to be a juror on this case would you hold him liable because he collected his sperm in a jar and gave it to to women. You knew why they wanted it and you signed agreements on the transfer of sperm. Comment by Dardenella
No. I think everyone signing a contract / agreement about him relinquishing his parental rights would lead me to believe that the intention of the maternal biological parent was to raise the child with her partner as the other parent, not to hold the paternal parent responsible financially with no rights to visitation or to make parental decisions. Why would any man sign up for that? It makes zero sense.
Answer by QuinnMae at 10:55 AM on Jan. 8, 2013
Recently Bumped in Debate
Proposed amendment legally requiring businesses to openly display their...