The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 13    Average: 2.1/5]
31 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 6345
Rating: 2.1
Date: 01/06/13 10:16 AM

31 Responses to Kansas Sues Sperm Donor For Child Support

  1. Profile photo of piperfawn
    piperfawn Male 30-39
    4916 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 10:17 am
    Link: Kansas Sues Sperm Donor For Child Support - `No good deed goes unpunished.`
  2. Profile photo of FrankFurter
    FrankFurter Male 13-17
    84 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 10:27 am
    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.
  3. Profile photo of jtrebowski
    jtrebowski Male 40-49
    3359 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 10:30 am
    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.
  4. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3926 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 10:32 am
    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.
  5. Profile photo of Corydoras87
    Corydoras87 Male 18-29
    642 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 10:35 am
    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..
  6. Profile photo of Smoothjc1
    Smoothjc1 Male 50-59
    260 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 10:43 am
    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.
  7. Profile photo of jtrebowski
    jtrebowski Male 40-49
    3359 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 11:00 am
    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.
  8. Profile photo of NNoamfer
    NNoamfer Male 18-29
    1216 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 11:06 am
  9. Profile photo of OldOllie
    OldOllie Male 60-69
    15841 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 11:09 am
    I`d move out of state and tell them to go donate sperm to themselves.
  10. Profile photo of MrOrange
    MrOrange Male 30-39
    2402 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 11:45 am
    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.
  11. Profile photo of paperduck
    paperduck Male 18-29
    1745 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 12:00 pm
    Sperm donation in general is a really stupid idea. I can think of 20 negatives to 1 positive outcome that can come from it.
  12. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36843 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 12:08 pm

    Just when you think the gov`ment can`t get more stupid than it already is. . .
  13. Profile photo of Fancysucksss
    Fancysucksss Male 18-29
    1048 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 12:56 pm
    Wtf shouldn`t this be impossible since you have to pay for this poo? Greed comes with green I suppose
  14. Profile photo of Scuzoid
    Scuzoid Male 30-39
    1268 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 1:46 pm
    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?
  15. Profile photo of Scuzoid
    Scuzoid Male 30-39
    1268 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 1:49 pm
    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.
  16. Profile photo of BBJellyFish
    BBJellyFish Male 18-29
    550 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 2:35 pm
    F/uck you Kansas. F/uck you
  17. Profile photo of kangoala
    kangoala Male 18-29
    702 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 2:35 pm
    What Gerry said.
  18. Profile photo of Scuzoid
    Scuzoid Male 30-39
    1268 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 2:59 pm
    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.
  19. Profile photo of Ilikelogic
    Ilikelogic Male 40-49
    550 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 3:19 pm
    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)
  20. Profile photo of trippyhippy9
    trippyhippy9 Male 18-29
    559 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 3:25 pm
    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.
  21. Profile photo of Dad4Life
    Dad4Life Male 50-59
    2086 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 3:39 pm
    They circumvented the law by not using a doctor, that really makes their contract illegal.
  22. Profile photo of swiftkeys
    swiftkeys Male 18-29
    500 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 5:40 pm
    Lol, sucks to suck.
  23. Profile photo of jinxiejae
    jinxiejae Female 30-39
    2927 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 6:22 pm
    that is just stupid.
  24. Profile photo of DFWBrysco
    DFWBrysco Male 40-49
    307 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 6:50 pm
    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.
  25. Profile photo of kcpd2050
    kcpd2050 Male 40-49
    330 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 8:54 pm
    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...
  26. Profile photo of scapegoat7
    scapegoat7 Male 18-29
    210 posts
    January 6, 2013 at 10:46 pm
    Complicated but only because Kansas wants to be backwards. Sue the other partner. Men getting screwed even when there not.
  27. Profile photo of Musuko42
    Musuko42 Male 18-29
    2850 posts
    January 7, 2013 at 3:28 am
    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.
  28. Profile photo of Draculya
    Draculya Male 40-49
    14653 posts
    January 7, 2013 at 5:28 am
    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.
  29. Profile photo of sutra46
    sutra46 Female 40-49
    2550 posts
    January 7, 2013 at 8:47 am
    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?
  30. Profile photo of Wundt
    Wundt Male 40-49
    410 posts
    January 7, 2013 at 9:31 am
    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.
  31. Profile photo of Finker
    Finker Male 40-49
    505 posts
    January 8, 2013 at 9:35 am
    So when are the guns coming out to uphold your rights against an unjust government?

Leave a Reply