child support case (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

punisher440 -> child support case (1/3/2013 7:35:57 AM)

I just read this article and would like to hear other's opinions on it.Personally,I don't think a man that donates his sperm so a lesbian couple can have a baby should be responsible for paying child support...but that's just my opinion.Like it says in the article,no good deed goes unpunished.



ChatteParfaitt -> RE: child support case (1/3/2013 7:42:43 AM)

I don't think he should be responsible for child support. They had an agreement, as far as I'm concerned the state of Kansas should uphold it.

This sounds like some homophobic prosecutor looking to make the lesbian couple 'pay' by putting them in the media spotlight and punishing the person who donated the sperm so they could have a child.




Lucylastic -> RE: child support case (1/3/2013 7:47:43 AM)

Its down to the State trying to make the woman name the father, from what I can understand, to collect back their welfare payments for the child even in the case of (contracted) sperm donation, Personally I think its an asinine case, and feel sorry for the poor bloke.



Spiritedsub2 -> RE: child support case (1/3/2013 9:55:20 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: punisher440

I just read this article and would like to hear other's opinions on it.Personally,I don't think a man that donates his sperm so a lesbian couple can have a baby should be responsible for paying child support...but that's just my opinion.Like it says in the article,no good deed goes unpunished.

Individual state laws apply to residents whether the specific law is known or acceptable to the resident. I don't think the Kansas donor was aware of that law, but I would think that before giving out some sperm, he should have at least briefly looked into the possible ramifications. Califomia has the same law as Kansas does on its books and an identical case being played out now. Personally I don't think it is a bad law; I'm a fan of everyone, male and female, being held responsible for supporting the results of their exercise of procreative rights. My personal hope is that forcing people to support their offspring will engender some hesitation to contribute to the world's crippling overpopulation problem.



kalikshama -> RE: child support case (1/3/2013 10:07:45 AM)

Kansas is seeking child support from Marotta, including about $6,000 in medical expenses related to the child's birth, according to its petition.

I thought the couple ran into financial troubles later but see they had them right from the start. I think it is the height of irresponsibility to have a planned pregnancy without having the means to afford a child and that it was immoral for Marotta to assist with this. We'll see if he bears legal responsibility.

Marotta should be declared the father and subject to financial claims because he donated the sperm directly to the women and not through a physician, as required by Kansas law, the state's petition states.

I wonder if sperm donation clinics do means testing before providing sperm?



Spiritedsub2 -> RE: child support case (1/3/2013 11:39:59 AM)

~fast reply
Remember Octomom? 8 kids at once via sperm donation, then she went on welfare so taxpayers supported the results of that "decision". And since unlike the Kansas case, Octomom went through a doctor, her sperm donor was safeguarded from welfare reimbursement obligations.



LizDeluxe -> RE: child support case (1/3/2013 11:40:03 AM)

That's a tough situation. I feel for the guy and at the same time... I don't. Craigslist sperm donor? Really? I can see him wanting to help and all of that but If you can navigate Craigslist to find someone willing to pay for that you can probably manage a quick web search to make sure you know the legalities involved. It astounds me that the web search would not be the very first thing he would do. The article leaves out much info. The 2007 case they cite? Was that through a doctor or clinic? If so then the sperm donor in that case likely gave up his parental rights at donation and reference to that case is irrelevant. Inherently, no I don't think it's right but the guy should have done his homework.

Craigslist is really creepy.




LadyPact -> RE: child support case (1/3/2013 12:07:04 PM)

I have to agree with you, OP. I'm almost wondering if somebody has a personal ax to grind. Either against lesbian couples or not wanting people to have the option of doing these things privately, rather than the expensive insemination process.

Not having seen their private contract, I'm wondering if the couple could have inserted a clause that Bauer was assuming all financial responsibility as father, rather than specifically releasing Marotta from child support and paternal obligations.



theRose4U -> RE: child support case (1/3/2013 12:21:29 PM)

I will have to hunt down the previous article I read about this. Seems kansas is trying to use judgement from a case where a clinic donor came back & tried to get visitation with child produced by random couple due to his donation. The arguement was because that guy donated to a clinic he had no standing.
Sounds like DA is trying to find the opposite pole of that law by demanding child support from a private donor becase the child received some medical benefits.

I know texas law used to be that child support "belonged" to the children therefore couldn't be signed away or reduced as part of a divorce settlement. That ruling lead to laws taking drivers & professional licenses away until support is current.

This isn't a new principle, just a different application designed to make a state employee famous



Lucylastic -> RE: child support case (1/3/2013 12:21:41 PM)

Hey Kali, I got my infor from here, LOL *yeah really*
The arrangement changed earlier this year when Ms Schreiner, the only parent registered on her daughter's birth certificate, applied for social welfare.

Ms Bauer had been supporting the child but was left unable to work due to ill health.
On October 3, 2012, attorney Mark McMillan filed a petition on behalf of the Department of Children and Families seeking a ruling that Marotta is the father of Schreiner's child and owes a duty to support her.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2255241/Sperm-donor-ordered-pay-child-support-lesbian-couple-despite-giving-rights-child.html#ixzz2GwhROxWd



kalikshama -> RE: child support case (1/3/2013 12:23:03 PM)

Kansas officials are required under the law to determine the father of a child when someone seeks state benefits, said Angela de Rocha, spokeswoman for the Department for Children and Families. The couple was compelled to provide that information, which led to investigation of the sperm donation.

Marotta should be declared the father and subject to financial claims because he donated the sperm directly to the women and not through a physician, as required by Kansas law, the state's petition states.



PeonForHer -> RE: child support case (1/3/2013 12:29:05 PM)

From your link - my bolds:

"Lawyers for Marotta argue that he had no parental rights because of his agreement with the couple and cannot be held financially responsible.

They cite a 2007 case in which the Kansas Supreme Court ruled against a sperm donor seeking parental rights because he did not have any such agreement with the mother, lawyers for Marotta said.

"So now, we are flipping the argument around," Marotta attorney Ben Swinnen said Wednesday."

Hmm. Seems a pretty potent defence, to me.



kalikshama -> RE: child support case (1/3/2013 12:29:11 PM)

Kansas should recognize same-sex relationships and go after the other mother. This is their NINTH child!!!



SirKelvar -> RE: child support case (1/3/2013 12:41:00 PM)

This is scary for me as a male because this type of case could defeat the purpose of the profit driven sperm donor clinics...the women and couples who choose donors from this system tend to go for the most educated taller successful ones(I doubt I need to defend my reasoning on this statement on this website). If a guy can be held responsible for all sperm donations then he could potentially have multiple baby mamas/daddies/couples coming after him years later for back child support due immediately plus interest and these guys 9 times in 10 or more won't be able to make payments especially if your job requires a license or federal background check you lose your ability to practice whether it be truck driver plumber doctor or cpa or lawyer. If you fail you go to jail often and when you have jail on your record it is hard to get any decent job so you just sentenced a ton of guys to perpetual poverty. Don't get me wrong we are the worlds largest sperm exporter to even foreign countries as well its a multi-billion dollar a year industry. It seems to me they are going after the wrong people the ones who were desperate for money and hit up donation centers be it in college or whatever. Or if we really what to make ourselfs responsible for procreative activities we could go back to ancient greek and roman ways of doing things where it is a murder charge for a man to masturbate however on the flip side women really couldn't say no and men could force women into sexual slavery using nothing but brute force the law upheld those too.



Lucylastic -> RE: child support case (1/3/2013 12:52:57 PM)

Having read more information than was in the original article I read...I think hes a bit of a burk for not knowing the legalities.
That it opens up a whole can of worms for other men who have given up sperm and the women have gone for the turkey baster route, instead of a doctor.
Ltho I can see why people wouldnt want to pay for that process.
I agre kali, they should have gone for the other woman... maybe she is on welfare too....
I know that being forced to identify the sperm donor in lieu of having benefits cut off tho is traumatic, happened to a friend of mine whos donor father was in jail for drunk driving and killing someone, they cut her off for six months, she ended up in the hospital, the kid was fostered out until she could get back on her feet.. She never got over that.



kalikshama -> RE: child support case (1/3/2013 12:57:59 PM)

quote:

If a guy can be held responsible for all sperm donations then he could potentially have multiple baby mamas/daddies/couples coming after him years later for back child support due immediately plus interest and these guys 9 times in 10 or more won't be able to make payments especially if your job requires a license or federal background check you lose your ability to practice whether it be truck driver plumber doctor or cpa or lawyer. If you fail you go to jail often and when you have jail on your record it is hard to get any decent job so you just sentenced a ton of guys to perpetual poverty.


I guess you miss the part in the article and the reposts about:

Marotta should be declared the father and subject to financial claims because he donated the sperm directly to the women and not through a physician, as required by Kansas law, the state's petition states.



theRose4U -> RE: child support case (1/3/2013 1:45:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama

Kansas should recognize same-sex relationships and go after the other mother. This is their NINTH child!!!

8 foster kids +1 bio is hardly octo-mom

ETA thanks lucy, that's the link I was thinking of.
Also I didn't read this as they didn't want to pay for "product" but wanted first hand knowledge of what he looks ike, personality & health issues



LafayetteLady -> RE: child support case (1/3/2013 2:14:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: theRose4U

I know texas law used to be that child support "belonged" to the children therefore couldn't be signed away or reduced as part of a divorce settlement. That ruling lead to laws taking drivers & professional licenses away until support is current.

This isn't a new principle, just a different application designed to make a state employee famous


Actually that law is significantly different.

I can understand the women doing this privately, although they certainly would have had an OB/GYN for the pregnancy, so it wouldn't have been too difficult to have him involved.

Aside from that, the document should have been drawn up by an attorney who would have been able to advise them of the legal ramifications, such as Kansas law dictating a doctor's involvement.

Where I do see a problem though, is that he was kept updated on the child's "well being" and the statement, he had "little" contact with the child.  That means he had some involvement that the state could claim was parental.

Personally, I don't think the guy should be held liable, but at the same time, I see that these people really made a mess of things with how they did it.



theshytype -> RE: child support case (1/3/2013 7:12:28 PM)

Why should the mothers be void of any legal ramifications for seeking a sperm donor illegally? Shouldn't they know the law as well?

I feel bad for him, I do. Although I find it incredibly creepy myself, he was trying to do a good deed.




kalikshama -> RE: child support case (1/3/2013 7:20:15 PM)

quote:

8 foster kids +1 bio is hardly octo-mom


Maybe (hopefully) one of our Brits will slap me for saying this, but according to the Mail they had adopted 8 children before they sought to have a biological child.



Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875