Sperm Donor Ordered to Pay Child Support for 18-Year-Old, page 3

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times

reply posted on 4-12-2007 @ 01:33 PM by PeaceUk

Crazzyyy
He has no responsibility over the child whatsoever.
He didn't play a part in it's upbringing and has probably never even met the teenager.

reply posted on 4-12-2007 @ 02:53 PM by traderonwallst

reply to post by riley

The kid is an adult so it's not an issue..

But isn;t that the whole issue of the thread? You say he can not sue for custody because he is an adult. But you think he should provide child support???? Sounds like a circular answer, or dare I say....maybe a bit hypocrical (just kidding :lol

reply posted on 4-12-2007 @ 03:31 PM by Area_X

reply to post by _Phoenix_

The world of father's rights is completely screwed up. This is why he got hit with child support and is true for most states.
1. If you allow, or if the mother puts your name on a birth certificate with or without your knowledge and you are not a custodial parent and/or married to the mother, you can be ordered by the state to pay child support without any choice by you or the mother.
2. If you sign away your rights to a child, you are signing away your rights, not your financial resposibilities as far as the law is concerned and at any time the mother can come after you for child support.
3. Basically, men have NO rights when it comes to children. The mother chooses IF the child will be born, what name goes on the birth certificate (in effect controlling whether or not the state will force you to pay child support), and gets all custody rights automatically unless there are extreme circumstances. (And even in extreme cases, the mother still wins half the time. A lawyer once told me that If I made twice the income of the mother, could provide a stable enviroment for the child, better schools due to location, and passed a urine analysis and background check, that I'd still have a 50% shot at winning against an unemployed, recovering heroin addict mom just getting out of her second consecutive stint in rehab with no driver's license.)

reply posted on 4-12-2007 @ 03:36 PM by apc

Mothers have favor in courts for obvious biological reasons, but a mom can still lose in court. I know someone (can't really call her a friend anymore) who has supervised visitations with her daughter. The dad was/probably still is an IV meth addict, but mom was couch surfing. The dad has the kid. Go figure.

reply posted on 4-12-2007 @ 09:21 PM by riley

Originally posted by traderonwallst
reply to post by riley

The kid is an adult so it's not an issue..

But isn;t that the whole issue of the thread?

No it isn't. The guy is trying to use a verbal agreement as a defence when he is the one that broke it.

You say he can not sue for custody because he is an adult. But you think he should provide child support????

My opinion is that the father can't claim to be a donar as he didn't walk away as agreed.. he imposed himself into the paternal role and, again it's NA becuse he never asked for custody. He wanted to be a part-time dad instead of a donar yet now he's crying foul. HE broke the agreement.. not them.
As for providing back payment under normal cicrumstances.. are you saying all deadbeat dads who get their girlfriends pregnant and take off and leave her in the lurch shouldn't have to pay the mother after she's given up her life for motherhood and has been struggling for twenty years without support against poverty and social persecution? how fair is that?
It seems like you are using this case to discuss you own thoughts on family court issues. If you want to do that you shoud start another thread but as it is it's not relevent to this case.

Sounds like a circular answer, or dare I say....maybe a bit hypocrical (just kidding :lol

..get your hand off it.

oh and you ignored all my points YET AGAIN in favour of winging about how unfair the world is to biological dads. Perhaps, given the fact you started this thread.. you could discuss the case at hand and not ones that have nothing to do with it? give it a try at least.

My points again:
..the fathers name on the birth certificate AT HIS REQUEST even though he's married to someone else and he's 'only' a sperm donar.
the verbal agreement and not a contract.
insemination without a labs which could have been sexual intercourse with a coworker/friend .
the fact he sent prezzies.
he sent cards signed "Dad".
the father/son phone calls.

[edit on 4-12-2007 by riley]

reply posted on 4-12-2007 @ 10:20 PM by US Monitor

Remember, no good deed goes unpunished!

reply posted on 4-12-2007 @ 10:53 PM by riley

..the article never said he was 'good'.

[a one liner I couldn't help.. and a second so it's not a one liner.]

reply posted on 4-12-2007 @ 11:26 PM by Obliv_au

usually donors are anonymous to the people involved, and therefore dont have their name on the birth certificate either.

i think putting his name on the birth cert. is where he screwed up, because its legally admitting its his.

its real sad it has to be that way though and you'd think the lesbian couple would show some gratitude to the guy for giving them the gift of a child, something they would *NEVER* conceive as a couple unless one went out for a night on the town and got knocked up by some drunk dude in the back seat of a car.

gold diggers suck..and surely thats what this is all about, purely digging for gold within a potential gold mine (the doctor + his doctor wifes above ordinary household income)

reply posted on 4-12-2007 @ 11:44 PM by riley

Originally posted by Obliv_augold diggers suck..and surely thats what this is all about, purely digging for gold within a potential gold mine (the doctor + his doctor wifes above ordinary household income)

eh. the birth mother was apparently a doctor and his co-worker so to say she's a gold digger doesn't make sense. Not sure why she's after money but it sounds like there's more to it.. maybe it's payback because he wouln't stay out of their lives as agreed? It would be nice if we could get the other side of the story.

reply posted on 5-12-2007 @ 01:18 AM by Files

"he allowed his name to be put on the birth certificate."

All I can say, what the hell was he thinking by signing the birth certificate?
Sad to say he had it coming, I totally disagree with the back child support.
Its all the small things in life that comes back and bite you in the ass.
He learned it the hard way sadly...

reply posted on 5-12-2007 @ 01:53 AM by riley

atm I'm considering it a 'stupidity tax'.. you don't call yourself a sperm donar and then start sending prezzies to it..

I'm not sure if he should pay or not as we're only beng given part of the story. If he had sex with her to get her pregnant I definently wouldnt call it a "good will" gesture.

reply posted on 5-12-2007 @ 03:07 AM by ValhallasValkyrie

In all honesty, I cannot agree to this decision.

The child is a legal adult now, so I fail to see how child support would come into play. However, I am thinking what is going to be ordered is the man pay back child support for 18 years. That is a lot of money and it truly does make the couple look bad for seeking it at this point in the child's life.

As for the man, he should have gotten legal advice and papers drawn up before doing as he did. He should have also refrained from contacting the child in any manner. His name should not have been on the birth certificate either. He was a donor. Nothing more. And as a donor, he should not have existed in any way in that child's life. At least no more than his parents telling him he was concieved from a sperm donor and leaving it at that.

Both sides are at fault here, though the larger blame is definately to be laid at the couple's feet. What they have done is made more people suspicious of helping others out for fear of this happening to them.

reply posted on 5-12-2007 @ 08:02 AM by traderonwallst

Originally posted by riley

eh. the birth mother was apparently a doctor and his co-worker so to say she's a gold digger doesn't make sense. Not sure why she's after money but it sounds like there's more to it.. maybe it's payback because he wouln't stay out of their lives as agreed? It would be nice if we could get the other side of the story.

Sorry, but being a doctor does not disqualify her from being a gold-digger. What if the daddy doctor makes more than her? What if she is not working any more and wants "him" just to cover college? Sounds like all good reasons to label her a gold digger. You say it would be nice to get the "other" side of the story, but you were quick to jump to assumptions earlier in thread, why not just assume she is a gold digger?

Maybe its payback time? Whats that supposed to mean? You have said that the father is financially obilgated, as he is the father. Then what is there to pay back. If the father had wanted to be a part of the childs life, he had every right, regardless of what she said or did.

reply posted on 5-12-2007 @ 08:03 AM by traderonwallst

reply to post by riley

Why do you keep assuming he had sex with her to get her pregnant????

reply posted on 5-12-2007 @ 08:07 AM by traderonwallst

reply to post by ValhallasValkyrie

Actually child support does not stop at the age 18. The problem could be where he lives. In NY child support is paid up through college, or the age of 23 (if attending college). I am sure she knows that, and this is why she filed it in NY and not where she is currently living. Looks like she is looking for a lottery ticket to pay for college, nothing more.

reply posted on 5-12-2007 @ 09:38 AM by riley

Originally posted by traderonwallstSorry, but being a doctor does not disqualify her from being a gold-digger.

I said that in response to someone else assumed she earnt less than he did.

What if the daddy doctor makes more than her? What if she is not working any more and wants "him" just to cover college? Sounds like all good reasons to label her a gold digger.

She'd be a gold digger if she wanted the money to buy gold, diamonds and luxuries. If she wants him to pay for their kid's college thats jujst paying for the kids education.

You say it would be nice to get the "other" side of the story, but you were quick to jump to assumptions earlier in thread, why not just assume she is a gold digger?

These 'assumptions' you keep accusing me of.. why not tell me what they actually are? I have backed everything I have said.

Maybe its payback time? Whats that supposed to mean? You have said that the father is financially obilgated, as he is the father.

He kept imposing homself in their lives even though he was suppose to only be a donar. The legal action might be emotional.

Then what is there to pay back. If the father had wanted to be a part of the childs life, he had every right, regardless of what she said or did.

..but his whole case rests on them agreeing that he was only to be a donar and not a father figure.

You really don't seem to be reading my posts at all.

reply posted on 5-12-2007 @ 09:42 AM by apc

She doesn't have to be a gold digger. Just an insane chow such as I related in my first post.

It's an overall crappy situation, but in the end the dad sporked up by, well, calling himself Dad.

reply posted on 5-12-2007 @ 10:02 AM by riley

Originally posted by traderonwallst
reply to post by riley

Why do you keep assuming he had sex with her to get her pregnant????

[Apart from the obvious..]
It's called SPECULATING.. not assuming and I do so because of the fact that he asked for dna tests which suggests he's not sure of the kids paternity. If someone donates sperm.. they usually wait for the woman to ovulate.. then wait for a positive pregnancy result. Why would he NOT be sure that it's his? If this woman is indeed a lesbian who'd only be comfortable with the 'sperm of a friend'.. she would NOT be having sex with lots of men so who else would be the father? He's gone from claiming to be doing a favour for a lesbian friend to accusing her of sleeping with men? I doubt she had lots of other co-workers willing to agree to the same deal.

..and, given he's a man of medicine one would think he'd KNOW exactly when he filled that little cup up and when she concieved. They were both doctors which makes it even more bizarre that they chose NOT to use a fertility clinic and instead went for an 'alterntive method'. Why wouldn't they use a clinic? The most likely scenario to me is that they had some sort of fling.

BTW. Again you completely disregarded my other points and started saying he should have the right to sue for custody etc. why do you keep carrying on about this? He was never even interested in custody so it has nothing to do with the subject at hand.

[edit on 5-12-2007 by riley]

reply posted on 5-12-2007 @ 10:52 AM by traderonwallst

reply to post by riley

I would have asked for a DNA test too if someone is going to start looking for MONEY from me, no matter what.

Now, say he gets the DNA test and its found out that his sperm was not used. It could happen. Can he now turn around and her for emotional reasons, since she led him to believe he was the real father. Hence all the prezzies you talk about and phone calls and cards signed DAD.

reply posted on 5-12-2007 @ 11:10 AM by riley

Originally posted by traderonwallst
reply to post by riley

I would have asked for a DNA test too if someone is going to start looking for MONEY from me, no matter what.

One would think wnagting to know if you're slomeone's father should be enough.. and he was obviously sure untill they took him to court. Lesbians don't tend to sleep with lots of men and he DID apparently sire a child ON PURPOSE.

Now, say he gets the DNA test and its found out that his sperm was not used. It could happen.

huh? Could you say things that actually make sense please? he donated sperm and the woman became pregnant.
If he had sex with her and she got pregnant obviously it was his sperm tghatv did itand not some magic lesbian fairy godmother.

Can he now turn around and her for emotional reasons, since she led him to believe he was the real father.

..'led him to believe'?

are you talking about some parrarel universe or something? HE asked for his name to be on the BC and HE agreed to get her pregnant.. obviously took steps to do so and she concieved. It was a PLANNED and mutual pregnancy so it makes NO SENSE for ton question paternity. Please stick to facts and not imaginary alternative possibilties that don't have anything to do with the reported story. You accused me of making assumtions but now you are saying that she could sue if it's not his kid? Did you not read the part where he donated sperm to help his lesbian friend?

..I give up. If you want to discuss the rights of fathers in general.. please at least start a different thread. YOU started this yet you keep steering the thread off topic. You keep trying to bend and make this news story fit your own agenda.. instead maybe you should find a news story that actually supports the views you are trying to express.

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >> ^^TOP^^