A story I heard on the radio:
A husband & wife could not conceive a child because the husband had a low sperm count, so they obtain the strong sperm and put it in the wife and they had a child. The rest of the sperm was kept frozen.
The husband & wife divorced. The ex-wife wanted another child by her husband so the doctor implanted her again.
Then the mother has a second child and files for child support.
The father says he didn't have anything to do with fathering this child even though his sperm was used from the frozen bank.
So they go to court. The judge has to decide who the father of the child should be and choses the doctor to be the legal father because it was the doctor who impregnated the wife.
The doctor turns out to be a female doctor.
I found this story to be quite humorous but also leaves much room for discussion and thought.
So what are your thoughts?
2007-10-12 16:49:05 · 5 answers · asked by Naturescent 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Don't get upset about the story. This is not a true story which is why as I was listening to it, I found humor in it.
I pray nothing like this happens, but because we don't regulate these things, who knows what is right and wrong?
2007-10-12 17:10:29 · update #1
Awe NUTS!!!! He should've went to the bank for a withdrawal.
2007-10-12 16:53:50 · answer #1 · answered by Joe Richtofen 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think that is absolutely ridiculous. I think that if a woman divorces her husband then she should not legally be allowed to use his sperm from a sperm bank without his written permission to do so. Because for all anyone knows she had the kid just so she could get more child support.
However, you could come from the other side of things and say that when they get divorced she gets half of everything and if his sperm is in a sperm bank she could get half his sperm (hahahaha... ) oi. What a crappy situation!!
2007-10-12 23:57:54 · answer #2 · answered by PUREfect Your Skin 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
First of all, that is not a true story.
Second, the court wouldn't do that. They would list the State in which the woman birthed the child to be listed as "father" on the birth certificate.
Third, she would NOT be able to collect child support for the second child. She could only collect for the first.
2007-10-13 00:21:10 · answer #3 · answered by cyanne2ak 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Sounds like an urban legend to me. (And, it only "leaves much room for discussion and thought" for people without any understanding of law whatsoever -- no offense. For anyone with a even a passing understanding of jurisprudence, there is nothing to ponder here.) In any event, source, please? (Other than "I heard it on the radio".)
2007-10-13 00:38:59 · answer #4 · answered by Rеdisca 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If true, it is rather funny, indeed
2007-10-13 00:25:58 · answer #5 · answered by Experto Credo 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋