if a woman uses he dead husbands sperm should the child recieve social security benifits?

Question

and who is responsible for the support of that child?

Answer 1

the child is still a US citizen, so yes to SS benefits

the woman that had the child is responsible for his care

Or is this a question of the woman wanting care from a deceased husband's ESTATE??

if so, it is infinitely challengeable and you'd have to ask a probate attorney

Answer 2

Sure. The child is still offspring, even if the child is a posthumous offspring. The law has long provided for children born after the death of a parent in an inheritance context, but until recently has not had to confront the question of children being conceived after parental death.

Courts in two leading decisions, Woodward [Woodward v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 760 N.E. 2d 257 (Mass. 2002) in Massachusetts and Gillett-Netting [Gillett-Netting v. Barnhart, 371 F.3d 593 (9 th Cir. Ariz., June 9, 2004)] in the Ninth Circuit, have interpreted the Social Security Act (hereinafter “Act”) as it relates to posthumously conceived children’s right to inherit. Under the Social Security Act, a child is entitled to insurance benefits provided he or she is a child of an
individual who dies fully insured, and the child is unmarried, under the age of eighteen and was dependent on such individual at the time of his or her death.

If a child’s status is disputed, the Social Security Administration may reference state intestacy law to determine whether a child is entitled to benefits. 42 U.S.C. § 416(h)(2)(A) (2005) ,

The Ninth Circuit decision in Gillett-Netting involved a claim for Social Security survivor benefits by the mother of twins conceived ten months after their father’s death. The children were conceived using sperm their father deposited before
undergoing chemotherapy for the cancer that quickly took his life. Initially, the children were denied benefits on the basis that they were not the decedent’s children under the Social Security Act and were not dependant upon the decedent at the time of his death.

The decision was reversed when the higher court determined the children were the decedent’s legitimate children under Arizona law, and therefore deemed dependant upon him, entitling the children to benefits.