Actor testifies on behalf of paternity-rights bill

Children should have the rights to both parents. I am seeing a pattern of things getting muddy when parents try to negotiate parental rights/responsibilities before birth. I saw this in the case posted the other day about adoption and the dad signing away his rights before birth, then changing his mind afterwards and trying to say he didn't know what he was signing and using his Cherokee heritage as a legal defense.

In my opinion, most situations would be best if everything is done to allow both biological parents to care for the child, no matter what occurs before birth. I take the perspective that it is the child's rights to be cared for and have a relationship with both parents and not up to the parents to negotiate. I would still alow adoption in certain situations, but it would be both parents transferring those rights to new parents after the birth. I don't support sperm/egg donorship, however if it is going to remain legal, at the very least, children should have the rights to an accurate birth certificate.

What I think I am seeing is men who want children (or their genes to live on) but don't want the responsibility within the custody/support system we have in place today. I acknowledge that mothers and fathers are faced with different choices and responsibilities. IMO this is a valid concern and we should fix the system before we allow parents to negotiate rights which belong to the child, not the parents.

In both the Cherokee fathers adoption case and this Jason Patricks sperm donor case I see men who thought they were getting "financial abortion" type benefits. For the Cherokee father he admits he was fine with the mother raising the child herself with him not having any financial responsibilities (probably thought he could have a peripheral role). He only got upset when he found out the child was adopted out; and Jason Patrick did not know he would get emotionally attached to his kid, and now wants full rights, even though they used artificial insemination, he didn't sign birth certificate. He made no attempt or request to sign and he did not acknowlege the child as his own for the first year, and he didn't pay child support. He claims he was protecting the child from his "fame". I've never heard of the dude, so I am not sure how famous he is. Also the "intended parent" document he mentions is not an agreement between him and the mother, but rather a description or title on the documents he signed at the clinic.

The more ways we allow fathers to opt out of paternity before birth, the more I see them change their minds later on. I don't think this is fair to fathers, mothers or children. But I understand what motivates men to opt out, and I advocate to change the system.

I've read a few different articles on the case. This is what I understand to be the details:

They were in a romantic relationship on and off for ten years.

After a break up, she approached him and told him she was interested in having a child, and would like to use his sperm for artificial insemination (AI). He agreed. She says it was all in the context of being a single mother. He wanted his involvement to be a secret. She has a hand written letter from him, explaining that he could not be a father and wants no one to know of his involvement. He says the letter was written casually and should not be legally binding, and that he later came to an understanding that he would be a father. Although he is not denying the "secrecy" part of his involvement. So I guess he wanted to be a "secret father"?

At the sperm donation clinic, he signed where the forms said "intended parent". I am not sure if she knew/saw this or if she realized how it could be interpreted. These were forms between him and the clinic. Mr. Patric and the mother did not have any type of written agreement between each other about parenting rights and responsibilities.

Her family and friends considered her a single mother by choice having used AI. No one knew that Mr. Patric was the sperm donor. He was not with her during the pregnancy, he was not present at birth, he did not sign birth certificate (or make any effort to get his name on certificate), child does not have his last name, he paid no child support or expenses.

However, a year after the child's birth, they began dating. During this time the child came to know Mr. Patric as his daddy. After a year of dating and forming a relationship with his child, they have broken up and now Mr. Patric wants full paternity rights and shared custody. She has said she will give him ability to maintain a relationship with the child, but not shared legal and physical custody.

This is a complicated case with no written agreement, so each has a different account to what the understanding was, and different accounts of Mr. Patric's role in the beginning from conception to the child's first year when they were not dating. Mr. Patric claims his paternity was a secret to protect the child from his fame. He made no announcement to his friends and family about the child's birth, although he says they know now. I'm not sure why Mr. Patric did not seek legal advise before fertilization and I also find it hard to believe he was so unfamiliar with sperm donor paternity laws. Did he actually go into the procedure thinking he had a legal right to the child, even though he had no legal responsibilities?

Poor kid. Stuck in the middle.

This case and others like it represents everything I have concerns about. I don't like single parenting (especially by choice), I hate sperm/egg donation (although this case could have just as easily been caused from natural sex). I believe parenting is a right to the child that should not be terminated or negotiated by the parents.

I think it is sad that fathers are so scared to become parents that terminating their rights seems like a good choice (at first). It also shows that men have a biological desire to have their genes "live on" so often paternity has little to do with parenting, but knowing they have offspring. (the early stages of this scenario seem to indicate Mr. Patric wanted offspring, but not parenting. I see cases like this all the time).

Sex, fertilization, birth and raising children are all part of the reproduction cycle. I don't like breaking it down and negotiating each aspect into seperate legal agreements. It's not what nature or biology intended and I do not believe it is healthy for society. Healthy two-parent families rarely form when we allow stuff like this, and children get short-changed as it almost always involves cutting out the father.