data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9178a/9178a8080e440b5b3c2780b00fc44bc146d81143" alt="Subscribe to Syndicate"
Kansas sperm donor asks for judgment without trial
Article here. Excerpt:
'A Topeka man being pursued for child support by the state after he donated sperm to a lesbian couple is asking a judge to rule in his favor before a trial.
An attorney for William Marotta filed a motion this week in Shawnee County District Court asking for the summary judgment for his client, contending that the Kansas Department for Children and Families is asking the court to do “what no court has ever done” in concluding that a sperm donor is a father when neither the donor nor the biological mother is seeking that result.
The state contends that Marotta must pay child support because he is the father of a girl born to a lesbian couple in 2009. Marotta argues that he and the couple signed a contract waiving his parental rights and responsibilities.
The state filed a motion in May seeking a summary judgment in its favor. Timothy Keck, a co-counsel for the state, contended in that motion that the contract between Marotta and the couple was invalid because they didn’t follow a Kansas law that requires a licensed physician to perform the artificial insemination in cases involving sperm donors.'
- Log in to post comments
Comments
I don't really understand why
I don't really understand why Keck is getting involved.
I presume it is because one or both lesbians are claiming
benefits for the child based on means.If the ruling goes the way of the state(and that is supposed to mean saving the public money)it follows that all sperm donors will have to vet the potential recipients first to ensure no benefits will be claimed for.
I am for the state in this since I don't see why women
who,in this case have decided on children,should be able to claim for them other than what the state normally allows.Too much taxpayer money goes to single parents
who cannot afford children.In this case it is 2 of them
even if they have split up.Furthermore,these men don't do it for the love of children or to do a favour in particular,no they do it for money.They have no respect for themselves at all.
One unusual fact is that this
One unusual fact is that this sperm donation was NOT done in a clinic or performed by a licensed physician. So my guess is it was done at home with a self written contract. Not very smart. If the biological father is not ordered to pay child support, then I could see how this could pave the way to defraud the state much like many couples in welfare communities keep father off the birth certificate and claim father is "unknown" even when he is the father to the child. People could then go around claiming "sperm donation" and come up with quick hand-written contracts.
I assume the mother(s) are below the poverty line and need assistance in the form of welfare medical benefits, food stamps and such. It probably would have been better if mother(s) claimed father was unknown, instead of presenting their flimsy contract with father's name on it. None of the people involved seem too smart. The state does not want to pay out benefits to the mother, when there is a biological father with the means to provide, as in a typical situation this would not be fair to taxpayers.
There is so much I don't like about artificial fertilization, I don't support it for many reasons, but if it is going to stick around it needs more regulation, although it would not help in this case as they acted ignorant of any laws or policies. A basic regulation would be assuring that parent(s) have the means to support a child until the child reaches adulthood.
I'm not sure I like to see people getting away with ignorance. The biological mother and the biological father made choices to deliberately conceive and birth a child. I think they both owe the child their support.
PS- what about the non-biological mom legally adopting the child from the father?. I'm not sure about the legality of same sex couples and adoption. I think it is legal in some states. It probably should have been done at birth and a stipulation of the contract (I'm really not sure what the other mother agreed to). But this mother and father do not sound like they give this stuff much thought which is why they are all in this mess.