Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Sperm Donor Ordered to Pay Child Support for 18-Year-Old

page: 2
1
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by traderonwallst
That a whole lot of assumptions. Didn't anyone ever tell you when you assume...you make an "ass" out of "u" and "me". Please don't include me in your assumptions.

1. I didn't include you in any assumptions.
2. ..In fact I didn't really assume anything. I gave a viable alternate theory of him getting a coworker up the stick and then calling it 'a donation'. That news story is heavily biased.
What I have seen you doing is biting the official line hook line and sinker about the evil lesbians conning this poor charitable man without even bothering to dig any deeper. Obviously something else has gone on and yes he DID claim the kid as his own as he's on the BC and tried to establish a father son relationship by sending prezzies from 'dad'. Sorry.. can't have it both ways so he's not really a victim imo.

Btw. Please allow others to have alternative opinions as otherwise all it's going to do is turn a discussion into a gay bashing woman hating thread.

Oh. it has already.

[edit on 3-12-2007 by riley]




posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 09:51 AM
link   
Are those so-called feminists happy now?



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 10:09 AM
link   
The important thing to understand here is...

...He allowed his name to be put on the Birth Certificate!!!

That was his mistake.



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Raist
I think it is more of a free money issue than an actual child support issue. This is just one more example of a system that gives hand outs to those who do not deserve it while screwing over the person who had good intentions at heart.

The lesbian couple should, by rights, be classified as the TWO parents. The Child Support system, if it's anything like it is in Australia, is designed to extract the maximum amount of money possible so the Government can save on welfare costs, leaving the paying parent in poverty and the receiving parent profiting greatly.
Most likely, because he is/was a doctor, all someone saw was $$$$$$$$.
Yes, it seems to be a "free money" issue. "Child" support is the convenient excuse.

[edit on 3/12/07 by NuclearPaul]



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by _Phoenix_
[Donate is a odd word, they are giving their sperm, sex or not, they are STILL the true father, in the real world giving sperm the sex way, then going about and forgetting about the baby, as if it dont excist, not having responsibilty over the baby, well thats what some like to call a bad man.

[edit on 3-12-2007 by _Phoenix_]


I would like to see you tell that to the father, who actually brought the child up. If a married couple conceive through sperm donation.....and a father lovingly brings up a child for 18 years; does some stranger really have the right to walk back into the life of the child and say. Hey stop calling him daddy, I am your real daddy?

Come on.....please. Your making no sense. The father is the father who brings the child up. He did not participate in bringing the child up, made no decisions and let the 2 mothers bring him up as they saw fit. If he is being forced to provide child support, he should also be allowed to take the 2 women to court for sole custody. Am I wrong? or you going to be a hyppocrite and only take the side of the women in this case? Ya see, you can;t have the rules work both ways.



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by riley
1. I didn't include you in any assumptions.
2. ..In fact I didn't really assume anything. I gave a viable alternate theory of him getting a coworker up the stick and then calling it 'a donation'. That news story is heavily biased.
What I have seen you doing is biting the official line hook line and sinker about the evil lesbians conning this poor charitable man without even bothering to dig any deeper. Obviously something else has gone on and yes he DID claim the kid as his own as he's on the BC and tried to establish a father son relationship by sending prezzies from 'dad'. Sorry.. can't have it both ways so he's not really a victim imo.

Btw. Please allow others to have alternative opinions as otherwise all it's going to do is turn a discussion into a gay bashing woman hating thread.

Oh. it has already.

[edit on 3-12-2007 by riley]


You did make assumptions. And as far as I am concerned they are assumptions that are WAYYYYY out there. Almost to the point as being ridiculous (without any kind of evidence). I bet the mothers never truly saw him as a father but just a donor. Anyone can have an opinon, just as long its viable. Your opinion, is not viable unless there is some kind of proof. Your opinion is just way to far out in left field.

And when the hell did I evere turn anything into a discussion about gay bashing or woman hating?



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by NuclearPaul
[The lesbian couple should, by rights, be classified as the TWO parents.
[edit on 3/12/07 by NuclearPaul]


Can not possible classify 2 women as parents. It is IMPOSSIBLE for them to concieve a child. All children have 1 mother and 1 father. This statement is for classification purposes only. If I adopt a child and 10 years from now find out that the mother won a lottery, despite being a drug addict when she gave the child up, do I have a right to sue her for child support? Of course not. I raised that child, that child is mine. But if you live in the state of NY, that mother can now sue you for the return of her child. The system is completely wrong. You give up the rigths, you can't get them back. Its just not fair for parent to love a child for any amount of time, just to have them taken back because someone changed their minds.



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by traderonwallst

I would like to see you tell that to the father, who actually brought the child up. If a married couple conceive through sperm donation.....and a father lovingly brings up a child for 18 years; does some stranger really have the right to walk back into the life of the child and say. Hey stop calling him daddy, I am your real daddy?

Come on now your starting to make things up, I didnt say anything about this, all Im saying is that consequences CAN happen, being a sperm donor is something that shouldnt be taken lightly. I dont know where your getting these ideas.



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 12:25 PM
link   
Let this be a lesson to anyone who wants to donate sperm. The guy’s mistake was having contact with the child. He sent a card signed “dad” so the kid reads the card and thinks “I have a daddy!". It’s not something you are going to forget. When you get sperm from a sperm bank a situation like this is not possible. Why would two people in the medical industry have trouble finding a sperm bank? Is it a gay rights thing? Maybe she wanted some of that Doctor DNA?



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by jojoKnowsBest
 


Just like Mellisa Etheridge and her "mate". They actively pursued Jerry Garcia of the Grateful Dead for DNA for thier "child". Does this mean that the kids is the heir to the Greatful Dead fortunes?

I think not. But if thats how society is going to start working, we are in for a lot of trouble.



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 01:46 PM
link   
Dang he has got to pay and did not even get to enjoy the sex that comes with making a baby. Sucks to be him for sure



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by traderonwallst
reply to post by jojoKnowsBest
 


Just like Mellisa Etheridge and her "mate". They actively pursued Jerry Garcia of the Grateful Dead for DNA for thier "child". Does this mean that the kids is the heir to the Greatful Dead fortunes?

I think not. But if thats how society is going to start working, we are in for a lot of trouble.


Funny thing is that Mellisa cannot probably get child support but his child would likely have rights to his fortunes since his mom cannot sign away his rights.



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 03:09 PM
link   
IMHO as far as i can tell oral contracts mean nothing..he should of documented it officially and not allowed his name to be put on birth certificate..the mother being a doctor herself, i wouldnt imagine finances to be a problem there..maybe just greed..

lesson learnt by all men considering doing this type of donation...



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by traderonwallstYou did make assumptions. And as far as I am concerned they are assumptions that are WAYYYYY out there.

Assuming he had sex with the coworker to get her pregnant is not an assumption thats 'way out there'..
it's a viable theory. The FACT that he's asked for paternity tests suggests they didn't use labs at all.. in fact it suggests he's not even sure she was a lesbian. Lesbians aren't really prone to having sex with various men and I doubt very much other men would have stupid enough to consent to such an arrangement without a contract.

Almost to the point as being ridiculous (without any kind of evidence).

You haven't provided any evidence that the lesbians were in the wrong.. you've just said 'thats not fair' repetively.

I bet the mothers never truly saw him as a father but just a donor.

In fact he had alot of contact with the kid in his younger years.. with visits, prezzies and cards. HE asked for his name to out his name on the BC to give the kid 'a sense of identity': ie. know who his father is. Thats called a 'benefit'.
Then they moved away from him. Doesn't sound like he complied with the 'absent sperm doner with no benefits' at all.. he made a point of making sure his son knew who his father is.

Anyone can have an opinon, just as long its viable. Your opinion, is not viable unless there is some kind of proof. Your opinion is just way to far out in left field.

yep, yep, yep..
Thats a few times you've said that yet.. without actually explaining WHY it's illogical you just keep abusing me for it.

And when the hell did I evere turn anything into a discussion about gay bashing or woman hating?

You've tried to shoot down all opposing arguments [well mine] as being 'ridiculous'.. and if you'll bother to look, you'll see the very next post following my last one makes a snide, biggoted remark about feminists.

That is what happens when you don't allow others to voice their opinions. This is now the 2nd post of mine you've publically dismissed as being full pf assumptions. FACT is most men who donate sperm sign contracts where they sign away their rights to the child. He gave a verbal agreement [apparently] yet HE broke it. This is reported in the story so how is it an assumption? His excuse is just as weak as any man who's said "but she said she was on the pill." He's a wealthy, married doctor.. not some college student who got paid to donate in a cup one day. Why would he not seek legal advice before donating his sperm? Something else went on.. and thats not an assumption.. thats stating the obvious.

[edit on 3-12-2007 by riley]



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by riley
What kind of married man donates sperm to a co-worker just to be nice? yeah right..

I would drop one in a cup for a co-worker. What can I say, I'm a nice guy.
Of course, I'm not married, so any excuse to scrap works for me. And besides, it's not like you're agreeing to be a surrogate, you're just takin' a few minutes to handle your business.

Look, if I were this guy I'd be all like, "look honey, if you're going to act like we were together, then let's make it official. That's right, naughty time equals money, how do ya like them apples, whore."

But I'm a filthy pig, so what do I know?


And apparently a stupid one, edited for spelling. And I'm sure there are some more mistakes.

Edited again for poor writing style...

The tastelessness however...
that can stay


[edit on 12/3/2007 by Sunsetspawn]



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 10:27 PM
link   
reply to post by riley
 


You still have not answered what I posed to you...How do we know that the WOMEN made the child feel like this was his father, other than ...yeah, he donated your sperm kid.

We don;t know, but again, you are making assumptions that this is the case. I have nothing against lesbians, so I hope your not insinuating that i I do. I have 2 female neighbors that are life partners, one is a divorcee with 3 kids. I regularly go over there and help with putting shelves up and guy stuff (not trying to sound anti-women). They are great people, but the mother and the father had a very ugly divorce, over the fact that she left him for a woman. She had repeatedly asked the courts to never allow the kids to see their father because he does not approve of her life style. Despite the fact that the judge says he is the father and he has a right to see the kids, she makes it near impossible for him. Sorry, but I just don't think thats right. Why do guys/fathers have no rights??? Might not be that way every where in the US, but here in US......even the courts only see "real" fathers as donors of sperm and money.

Sorry, but I am sick of it. Do you agree that he therefor has a right to sue for sole custody???? A mother would have that right, so why not the father???? If you feel he has the obligation to provide financial support, you must agree with me. I don;t think you are a hypocrite on this point. BUT, I could be worng.



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by traderonwallst
reply to post by riley
 


You still have not answered what I posed to you...How do we know that the WOMEN made the child feel like this was his father, other than ...yeah, he donated your sperm kid.

The story you posted says he did alot more than that. His name is even on the birth certificate so he wasn't just some unkown donor. Are you calling that one of my 'assumptions' as well?

We don;t know, but again, you are making assumptions that this is the case.

Incorrect.
You still have not answered my points at all or explained why they are "ridiculous"; he sent presents and cards signed Dad and had communication when he was young [before his parents' moved him away] so he put himself into a paternal role and made sure the kid knew him as such. Thats in the fox story. The source article actually says that the KID has stated that he has only known him as his father:

www.nypost.com...
The child signed an affidavit stating that he has "never known anyone other than [the man] to be his father," according to court documents.


I have nothing against lesbians, so I hope your not insinuating that i I do. I have 2 female neighbors that are life partners, one is a divorcee with 3 kids. I regularly go over there and help with putting shelves up and guy stuff (not trying to sound anti-women). They are great people, but the mother and the father had a very ugly divorce, over the fact that she left him for a woman. She had repeatedly asked the courts to never allow the kids to see their father because he does not approve of her life style. Despite the fact that the judge says he is the father and he has a right to see the kids, she makes it near impossible for him. Sorry, but I just don't think thats right.

I'm honestly not sure why you just told me all that. It has nothing to do with this story and failed to address any of my points. again.

Why do guys/fathers have no rights??? Might not be that way every where in the US, but here in US......even the courts only see "real" fathers as donors of sperm and money.

This case is a one off yet you have decided all sperm donors have to pay maintenence? Most are protected by the law.. but then again most sperm donors sign contracts, don't ask for their names to be put on the BC or send their kid prezzies from 'dad'.

Sorry, but I am sick of it. Do you agree that he therefor has a right to sue for sole custody???? A mother would have that right, so why not the father????

Doesn't sound like he wanted custody but to be a dad part time. He wasn't suppose to have any say at all yet sent him presents and cards. It's also a possibilty that they moved away because he was imposing himself in their lives after agreeing he wouldn't.

If you feel he has the obligation to provide financial support, you must agree with me. I don;t think you are a hypocrite on this point. BUT, I could be worng.

Please do not call me a hypocrite.. not only does that not make any sense but name calling is against ATS guidelines.

[edit on 3-12-2007 by riley]



posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 12:10 AM
link   
one thing i dont understand about this, is that if both mothers are working and we know the actual mother is a doctor..money isnt an issue. so why are they chasing him now..for support?
for the young man(18yrs old) to say he has only ever know (donar) as his father...yet the father was only contacting them up to age of 4..seems odd..what about 14yrs after that? did his mothers keep pointing it out over the years..and is this more about the young man(18yrs old) wanting the money or the mother.

with some luck maybe the donar(father) may actually have some sort of relationship with his son after this..



posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by riley
 


I never called you a hypocrite. I left a hanging question there.

Do you think the father has rights to sue for custody if he chooses....or does he have no rights at all???

[edit on 4-12-2007 by traderonwallst]



posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by traderonwallst
reply to post by riley
 


I never called you a hypocrite. I left a hanging question there.

..

I don;t think you are a hypocrite on this point. BUT, I could be worng.

oh how clever of you to figure out a way to not break the rules. So whats the point in leaving this question 'hanging there' other than pettiness? It has nothing to do the the subject and you never actually explained why you might consider me to be a hypocrite [even though of course you were only threatening to think I'm one at some later stage..
]
If you're going to try insult me at least back it up.. or better still you could actually address my arguments instead.



Do you think the father has rights to sue for custody if he chooses....

Wow. You've managed to completely ignore all my points. The kid is an adult so it's not an issue.. the story never mentions him wanting it so its irrelevent and most sperm donars wouldn't be interested in custody as they only want to sire not parent.

..but most would have brains enough to not do what he did.

or does he have no rights at all???

Whats with all the question marks? Of course fathers should have rights.. but I haven't been discussing other fathers.. I have been trying to discuss THIS one yet you don't seem to want to talk specifics [like the BC, prezzies, cards, phone calls, an 'unofficial' sperm donation without a lawyer etc]. This 'father' was just picking and choosing which rights he wanted and which responsibilities he didn't.





new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join