Kansas Sues Sperm Donor For Child Support

Submitted by: piperfawn 4 years ago in

"No good deed goes unpunished."
There are 31 comments:
Male 505
So when are the guns coming out to uphold your rights against an unjust government?
0
Reply
Male 409
Draculya has it right, they should have used a lawyer. We adopted a few years ago and it is the first piece of advice I give anyone who is considering adoption or anything similar... get a lawyer. A $1000 spent on legal fees would have saved all of this problem.
0
Reply
Female 2,549
@kcpd2050
Oy Vey
The gov is claiming child support from a biological father because they do not want to foot the bill.
Mothers are currently under financial difficulties.

Soooo if the mothers give the money back to the sperm donor, what are they supposed to feed the child? Tasty rock soup?
0
Reply
Male 14,835
On the face of it, this sounds like evil bureaucracy against a do-gooder. However, he did not go by the book, he did not even read the book and did not consult a lawyer (in a situation where there are obvious legal implications). He did not use a licensed physician and he did not even make sure the agreement was executed properly.

The clause about the insemination being performed by a physician is an important distinction as it would discriminate between children conceived in passion or where the couple separates but the non-custodial parent wishes to avoid financial obligation.

It seems to me that the state is bound by statute to pursue the case. There is a case to be heard, but if he can establish that his situation was not intended to be covered by the legislation then he should get off. If not, he may have a civil case against the couple for restitution plus costs.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
Devil`s advocate again:

Brenda and Dennis are an unmarried couple who decide to have a child. Dennis earns, Brenda doesn`t. Brenda and Dennis write up a contract stating Dennis is just donating sperm, and does not have to pay a penny to support the child.

They have the child, and Brenda claims she is an umarried mother with no income, and she has an agreement and a contract with the father that he will not have to pay to support the child.

Brenda and Dennis and their new baby live happily ever after together as a family, enjoying Dennis`s regular income and Brenda`s fraudulently-obtained state benefit.
0
Reply
Male 210
Complicated but only because Kansas wants to be backwards. Sue the other partner. Men getting screwed even when there not.
0
Reply
Male 330
Pay her the money and then she can just give it right back to the guy every month. Once she receives child support she can do what ever she wants with the money. Another moronic waste of taxs payers money...
0
Reply
Male 307
Woa... as usual, IAB`ers are making a biiiig assumption and going off half informed.

The issue at hand is NOT that they did not originally *GET* the sperm from a clinic or a doctor; reports (and even the state of KS) deny that this is a classic case of JO in a cup and then use a turkey baster.

The issue here is not the legality of the origination of the sperm - in fact, in most states (if not all, it`s been a while since I researched) there is no dictation of where sperm must come from other than that it is tested to ensure purity and no familial connection; this was done (as well as the "insertion") by the couple.

The problem is Kansas law, and as usual - not keeping up with the times and possibilites of homosexual parenting. The law needs to be changed to reflect this scenario thereby placing burden on the partner, instead of the "father" only.
0
Reply
Female 2,927
that is just stupid.
0
Reply
Male 500
Lol, sucks to suck.
0
Reply
Male 2,085
They circumvented the law by not using a doctor, that really makes their contract illegal.
0
Reply
Male 559
So, there are still 2 parents, but one of them is ill and they are basically asking for money to cover her financial commitments.

Imagine a heterosexual couple with a male that can`t reproduce. What if they were the couple taking the sperm donation? Later on down the road, if the man gets cancer, do they go after the sperm donor in that situation? No, they don`t. They give a family the help it needs. Just like they should in this situation.

Just another complication caused by the ridiculous laws against same sex marriage.
0
Reply
Male 550
Sperm donation via CRAIGSLIST ??

Why not transfering money via Western Union to a nigerian prince?
Why not buying a 20 dollar brand new Iphone6 from ebay?
Why not click on a link telling you you are the 1 millionth visitor?

Shouldn`t he have said "No stupid deed goes unpunished"?


(Assuming you can donate sperm anonymously and the insemination is done by a doctor, paid by health care, like in europe)
0
Reply
Male 1,268
I don`t think any of you guys are getting this. The biological mother is asking the state for money. Who`s money? "Yours." The state understands it`s laws, and while those suing the biological father may or may not agree with the current homosexual responsibilities when children are involved, they know there is nothing they can do to get money from the "other mother" who SHOULD be aiding what could be her current or ex-spouse if it were another state. These three individuals entered a contract that did NOT involve the state. The biological mother went TO the state for assistance. The state has no recourse to abide by anything in the contract between these individuals. The state is doing NOTHING wrong here by trying to get money from those responsible, and the biological father`s lawyer is an idiot for not convincing the father to pay the state and fight the lesbian parents for reimbursement.
0
Reply
Male 702
What Gerry said.
0
Reply
Male 550
F/uck you Kansas. F/uck you
0
Reply
Male 1,268
If I were the sperm donor, I`d be suing the "other mother" based off of their contract, not fighting the state on this. Pay the state, get the money back from the "other mother," taxpayers who had nothing to do with the child don`t pay for the child.

Admittedly, it`s a backwards roundabout way of doing it just because gay relationships aren`t recognized there, but SOMEONE is responsible for that child, and it sure as hell isn`t the biological mother`s neighbor.
0
Reply
Male 1,268
I`m sorry, but the mother is asking the state for financial assistance. The state absolutely has the right to dig deeper and try to find the money from taxpayers who had something to do with this woman`s financial status, rather than from that of every other state taxpayer. Now, the state can`t go after the mother`s former girlfriend as the state doesn`t recognize that girlfriend as holding any legal responsibility to either party. All three parties knew this ahead of time. The sperm donor knew the two women weren`t married because it wasn`t legal there.

And hey, where is the ex-girlfriend in all this monetary disputes? If the state is going to go after the sperm donor if the biological mother doesn`t withdraw her request for aid, why the frak isn`t the "other mother" offering to make those payments?
0
Reply
Male 1,048
Wtf shouldn`t this be impossible since you have to pay for this poo? Greed comes with green I suppose
0
Reply
Male 38,507

Just when you think the gov`ment can`t get more stupid than it already is. . .
0
Reply
Male 1,745
Sperm donation in general is a really stupid idea. I can think of 20 negatives to 1 positive outcome that can come from it.
0
Reply
Male 2,419
This would make me spit the dummy, i mean seriously? all parties agreed. The state has no F**king cause to stick it`s nose in this case unless it`s motives where to discourage sperm donaties to lesbian couples.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
I`d move out of state and tell them to go donate sperm to themselves.
0
Reply
Male 1,216
Murrica!
0
Reply
Male 3,364
markust123: " I`m actually curious to see if anyone is on Kansas`s side. I think we may have found the news item that unites everyone."

I`m not on Kansas`s side, but I`ll be happy to play "Devil`s advocate". The state might feel an obligationto require sperm donations to be done by a doctor to protect rape victims from having their attackers claim it was just a sperm "donation". That being said...the law should be changed to allow contracts made between the parties to be binding.
0
Reply
Male 260
Just another reason to NEVER GIVE THE STATE any information you don`t have to, She should have said I don`t know who the father is.
0
Reply
Male 642
same poo happening in germany at the moment.. 21 year old brat wants to know who her father is.. judges will likely give her the right, rendering the anonymity of donating sperm useless..

Girl.. there is a reason why it`s an anonymous donation.. he doesn`t want anything to do with you..
0
Reply
Male 4,395
I`m actually curious to see if anyone is on Kansas`s side. I think we may have found the news item that unites everyone.
0
Reply
Male 3,364
Tough call on this one. Ideally, the law should be changed to allow sperm donation to be performed at home without a doctor, but that has the potential to leave donors exposed to worse than just child support claims. All three parties had written agreements. I wonder why that wasn`t considered binding.
0
Reply
Male 84
That`s ridiculous. The contract clearly states he`s not responsible for child support. Granted, it`s between the mother and the donor, but still.
0
Reply
Male 5,081
Link: Kansas Sues Sperm Donor For Child Support [Rate Link] - `No good deed goes unpunished.`
0
Reply