It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Sperm Donor Ordered to Pay Child Support

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 24 2004 @ 07:02 AM

I'm fairly new here and I'm not sure of how much of the
articles I'm allowed to post. I'll put the link so you all
can go and read it.

A man who donated sperm was ordered to pay child support
for the twins that were born from that donation. This, even
though he and the woman involved agreed that he wouldn't.

I have a feeling the judge will be overturned. Her logic sounded
emotional rather than following the letter of the law.

Still, this is important because there are MANY sperm donors
out there who could potentially be hit with lawsuits for child
support, even though they were assured they wouldn't be.


posted on Jul, 24 2004 @ 07:16 AM
This has to be the most absurd thing I have ever heard in my entire life. It's pretty much common sense that if you donate sperm you're pretty much doing someone a favour whom for some reason cannot do it themselves. Now theres the chance of actually making these donars pay for the favour they are doing people? That is going to screw over the doners (no pun intended) to the point that no man will want to donate sperm and that will hurt the couples whom badly want a child but cannot concieve for what ever reason. These judges need should be stripped of their robe for the complete lack of common sense.

posted on Jul, 24 2004 @ 07:21 AM
d1k - I agree with you completely. It was a violation of trust and
common sense.

posted on Jul, 24 2004 @ 07:24 AM
This one will have to go to the state supreme court for the final ruling. The ruling discussed here is that of a three judge appealate court. I don't think too much should be read into the issue from this case. It's not the typical anonymous donor relationship. Tha man and woman had a two year affair which cooled down. She then approached him to be a donor and , notwithstanding a "no strings attached" agreement, she decided to take him to court. I don't think this one is an earth shattering precedent but donors may want to think twice.

posted on Jul, 24 2004 @ 07:39 AM
Sounds like he donated it first hand (pun intended) instead of thru an agency , these twins were the result of one on one procreation instead of anonomous insemination .

He could be lying , or she could be lying . If he "donated" by doing his business in a little plastic cup , and then left the building , that is one thing .

If it happened thru consentual sex he should have got it in writing to cover his cajones , otherwise he is a parent by choice and should support the financial aspect of raising the children . I would hope he is also given co-parenting rights instead of (taking his side for a moment) getting used for financial support with no interaction allowed . That would be the biggest burn ever . The $$ support should actualy give him the right to at least co-parent .

He should have a say in the rearing of these twins IMO .

It could have been an agreement that backfired when 2 costly little poopers entered the world , the woman may have been able to be a single parent of one child sucessfully , but not 2 , and she may be lying . In wich case this guy got it stuck to him.

My sister has 2 wonderful children from an anonomous doner , and is a succesful single parent . She paid about 5000 bucks for enough sperm for 5 insemenations . missed the first time , got lucky on 2nd and 3rd , and has 2 more on ice if she wants to try again .

Completely anonomous , or a written contract are the only ways to go on this one .

And the stuff is expensive guys , so don't waste it ....

posted on Jul, 24 2004 @ 07:59 AM
I am sorry to say but if I were the judge I would have come to the same conclusion.

1) These were two people who both confirmed a two year sexual relationship.

2) There is no written contract, or even proof of a verbal agreement, he says there was she says there wasn't.

3) If there was he should have known that she was obviously trying to hang on to him in some form or another and it would come back to haunt him.

4) If the judge ruled for him, how many guys could possibly come forward and say well actually we just had sex and conceived because she wanted a sperm donor. We had a verbal agreement that if she gotr pregnant I would have no responsibility. What a legal precedent this would be.

5) As previous posters have stated, do the donation through a sperm bank or through a written contract.

posted on Jul, 24 2004 @ 09:05 AM
Sadly there has actually been even more absurd though realted cases in the past. A few years ago, in two separate cases (one in AL and one in TX I believe), two men who had been paying child support for a few years each and who then each proved through paternity tests (that they couldn't afford when the children were born) that they were NOT the fathers were ordered by judges to continue to pay support... since the court couldn't determine who the real fathers were. Apparently the states figure as long as they have someone writing checks (and not them) it doesn't really matter who it is.

posted on Jul, 24 2004 @ 09:06 AM
I have had to raise the results of all my "donations" so should he......LOL

If the story is true he should have gotten it in writing.

It reminds me of the story of a guy that had his best friend try for 2 years to get his wife pregenet.

Then he found out his best friend had had a vasectomy

posted on Jul, 24 2004 @ 12:03 PM
I feel sorry for that guy that he was so stupid as to agree to being her donor in the first place... I mean, let's think this through: They had a 2-year affair. It ends. Now she wants HIM to be a "donor".

Sounds to me like she PLANNED on trying to trap him or stick it to him for ending things. It's woman like that - that give the rest of us (women) a bad name.

I certainly don't envy that judge at all. I do agree that since the "donor" couldn't produce proof of a written contract, or a witness to their verbal contract - the judge really had no other option.

But man-oh-man. No matter how you slice it, it's a bad situation for everyone; especially the kids. No kid should grow up doubting their paternity or how they came to be (he said/she said). Everyone should be able to grow up in a home and never doubt the fact that their parent(s) loves them.

posted on Jul, 24 2004 @ 12:10 PM
It is obviously more to the story that mised the Eye, like oddtodd say perhaps, The Donor Did The Honor.

posted on Jul, 31 2004 @ 03:25 PM
Well it really ends in that at least one of them is lying, and for what, money. And since these children or [child] are involved now it makes it worse than just lying.

I agree since there was no real evidence the judge did, what was in his opinion, the way to go. Although i have my doubts i cannot side with either of them, i still am dissapointed in the actions of both parties. Anyways what can you do.peace

[edit on 31-7-2004 by jrod8900]

posted on Jul, 31 2004 @ 03:27 PM
This has to be one of the stupidest things Ive heard all week.

Im suprised I havent seen this on TV yet.

posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 03:21 PM
Recently I was in Houston and saw in the paper numerous ads appealing to women to "donate" their ovas, and that they'd be reimbursed $2000+.
Had this been available when I was fertile, I surely might've pounced on the opportunity!

top topics


log in