Syndicate Partner SitesHis Side with Glenn Sacks is a nationally syndicated talk radio show devoted to men's and father's rights. Glenn Sacks discusses gender issues from the male perspective. 
Special Thanks To...The following organizations were early supporters of Mensactivism.org, and we thank them for their support. If you'd like to trade links with us, see our Mensactivism.org supporters page.
|
UK: Wife whose husband became secret sperm donor calls for change in the law to require partners' consentArticle here. Excerpt: 'A married woman whose husband donated sperm without her knowledge is calling for clinics to be forced to ask for a wife's consent. The unnamed mother-of-one from Surrey said she feared that children fathered with the sperm – who would be half-brothers or sisters of her son – may one day 'disrupt' the family by getting in touch. She has written to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority calling for guidelines on sperm donation to include the spouse's views – and says the sperm should be treated as a joint 'marital asset'. A controversial ruling in 2005 meant all children born through sperm donation – up to ten families are allowed per donor – have the right to trace their biological father when they reach adulthood. In her heartfelt letter to the fertility watchdog, she told how her husband had donated sperm against her wishes after suffering Post Traumatic Stress Disorder following the birth of their child.'
|
New User AccountsDue to problems with user accounts being used for spam, we require all new user account requests to be sent via email to newaccounts@mensactivism.org. Please let us know what username you would like in your email. Thanks for your patience while we look for a more permanent resolution to our spam problems. User loginFollow Us on TwitterDonationsClick on the icon below to make a donation to Mensactivism.org using PayPal, the most popular on-line payment system. Donations are what keeps this site running, and are only used for this purpose. For more info, or to send a donation by mail, see our Donations Page. Spread the word...We encourage everyone to feel free to further distribute the information found on our site, and we only ask that you help to spread the word about Mensactivism.org in the process: so please, say you saw it on Mensactivism.org! Thank You! |
Comments
sorry mom
a man's sperm is HIS OWN property UNLESS he WILLFULLY gives it to you or anybody else.
a woman or wife has ZERO claim to a man's sperm. just as a man has zero claim to a woman's eggs.
still -
in many places (u.s.) men are still required to get their mistress' consent to get a vasectomy.
Even in marriage both genders
Even in marriage both genders should have the right to fully own their own bodies and bodily material. So I cannot agree that the husband's sperm should be a shared asset. What I think should happen is that giving sperm to people outside the marriage for the purpose of making babies would be grounds for justifiable divorce. Just like a wife secretly accepting outsiders sperm for conception would be, or a wife secretly engaging in prostitution.
It is really a matter of a husband or wife secretly participating in an activity that is not commonly accepted within marriage. Does society need a more detailed marriage agreement to cover baby making material? This part of the marital contract would include things like abortion, sperm donation, egg donation, or surrogacy and sterilization. However, who would ever think of all that going in to a marriage. I think lawyers call contracts "consensus ad idem" aka "meeting of the minds" as there are implied expectations as no one could ever write a contract to come up with everything imaginable.
In their marriage I believe there was most likely "meeting of the minds" , and the husband was breaking his marital contract which is why he kept his sperm donating a secret. He would be at fault for causing a divorce (if that is what they decide) even though there is no question that his sperm fully belongs to him. However, as far as I know "fault" is not used to in divorce rulings, so "who's fault" is really a moot point.
" would be grounds for
" would be grounds for justifiable divorce."
It's my understanding that divorce has no need for justification in this day and age. "I want out" is sufficient to get the ball rolling. If marriage required justification, I would agree, but as things stand now, it's irrelevant.
That's why I said the point
That's why I said the point is moot in my last sentence :)
although I was not sure if fault has any impact in divorce under UK law, where this is taking place.