Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by SilentPanda, Dec 31, 2012.
That's just plain wrong. They're not entitled to any child support.
This is just stupid, I assume the donor signed his rights away to the sperm after the donation.
sorry but no that is 100% wrong. A sperm donor is a donor and after he has given his sperm he has nothing to do with the kid nor any responsibly for it.
Hey Panda Emeritus. Less knowledge, different perspective, more freedom.
On topic, it kinda sounds like a situation of systems leading to a certain outcome. Sounds like functionaries at the Kansas Department for Children and Families, covering their own arses, are doing the right thing, per their book. However, on a human level, as demonstrated by the lesbian couple's support, it seems unfair.
What many straight, married or committed couples don't sometimes realise, is that the law, entrenched as it often is and depending upon jurisdiction, doesn't quite have the flexibilty and nuance to deal with the variations of familial structures that are becoming common in the 21st century.
Hindsight is easy, but a pre-nupdonation contract/agreement might have helped here.
The state of Kansas is requesting the child support, not the couple. The couple is on the side of the donor. I only say this because I assume when you say "they're" you mean the couple.
I guess it's because the state of Kansas refuses to consider them a couple and considers the biological mother to be a single mom. It's just wrong on so many levels
Yup! And I enjoy it very much. There's a thread elsewhere I'm sure you can find in regards to it if you're unawares and care. Nuff about that though!
They had one but the state says it isn't valid since they didn't do the donation via a registered clinic.
I do believe the state is following the law properly, I just think the law needs to be revisited, but only after they recognize same sex marriage there in the first place. The couple should have done their diligence beforehand also if they didn't. If the gentleman impregnated her the old fashioned way (the article doesn't say I don't believe but I'm not sure how else they went about it without a clinic) I could see room for abuse in male/female relationship situations.
If this becomes a precedent then it will kill sperm donation stone dead.
Why would anyone do it?
My nephew exists thanks to a sperm donation.
He wouldn't be here otherwise.
Kansas can go ****** itself.
This donation was outside the setup clinical system. I don't know what Kansas' stance would be if it was done via the normal clinical method.
So do my 5 year old twins.
As others have said, I think this is something that's going to be changed. It seems like they were just "going by the book" - as different types of families emerge these things will have to change.
As much as I'd love them to recognize same-sex marriage, these things can be changed without bringing marriage into it. I live in Texas, where marriage won't be legal anytime soon, but adoption is. Before my girlfriend died, she legally adopted my children and part of the process was ensuring that if we broke up we would be the only two obligated parties.
In my experience, when we purchased from a Sperm Bank part of the agreement was that the donor would never be subject to any financial responsiblity for the child/ren.
The agreement is always only between donor and recipient.
Any agreement is worth nothing if the States suddenly pursue child support to be paid.
This is the key portion of the article. It is common practice (perhaps federally mandated - I don't recall at the moment) that when a single mother applies for welfare benefits on behalf of the child, the state goes after the biological father for purposes of reimbursement.
This was the single biggest reason I never donated when I had the chance. I was always afraid something like this would happen.
This country gets more and more pathetic by the day.
Hope this guy tells the state to go **** themselves.
Who would pay the child support.
Nah. What a stupid idea.
Is the problem because he donated sperm unofficially outside a recognized donation framework? My thought is that this does not usually happen.
So you hope this guy goes to the last vestige of debtor's prison? That's what happens when you don't pay your child support bill in this country - you get jailed for contempt.
It happens more than you think. Purchasing sperm from a bank (and then storing it)- especially a good one - is expensive. Add that to the cost of insemination/IVF....
It never ceases to amaze me that government feels the need to insert itself into our lives, of course with the couple here seeking FREE MONEY from the government, I guess they feel they can go after the "father" as well.
Deny the government aid money. Throw out the child support bs. Take personal responsibility for your actions and decisions ladies.
So to the legal question- My impression is that in sanctioned legal programs, donors have no responsibility towards any conceived children. If I was to guess, this arrangement was done on the side. If the State feels it's responsibility is to the child conceived outside of a legal exclusion framework, maybe this is why they are going after the father.
Why am I not surprised that is your position? You understand you are referring to two separate issues? While this does not apply, or should not apply to this situation, children deserve support from their parents. It is government aid only in that the state is ensuring the child gets support from its parents. But sperm donors, through a legal structure, should not be on the hook for support.
Happy New Year!
It should not surprise anyone to know I feel its none of the governments business if I enter into a private sale of sperm to a woman - lesbian or otherwise - trying to conceive.
Does the fact that I donated this privately make me any more legally the father than if I went thru an authorized sperm bank?
Apparently it does as far as responsibility. We live in a world defined by legalities. Is that bad? You could easily have a situation where without proper documentation and adherence to a legal structure, a woman could request child support from someone who in actuality was a sperm donor. Without documentation the State has no clue and might pursue. Generally speaking, I applaud States that go after dead beat dads. Should they go after this person? The answer appears to be "no".