This is absolutely wrong?

Question

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/healthbritainfertilityethics;_ylt=Av7eRGbFx5qvNCRdoukZsPQDW7oF

A British man who donated sperm to allow a lesbian couple to have a baby was criticized Tuesday after claiming he is being unfairly forced to pay for the child.

But Terri Arnold said Tuesday that, although originally he had no responsibility, Bathie had changed his mind and had become involved in the child's upbringing.

----------------------------

Excerpts from the article listed. This is wrong on all levels. Look, just because he helped you create a family and then was involved with the daughter does not mean he should be forced to pay child support.

I don't see how this is even remotely justified.

Shouldn't matter if he became involved, he most likely knew these two women well beforehand and was probably around this couple with child for some time. Of course he became attached.

It still should not matter though, the intent and act were done with assumption that the couple would pay for this child and raise it. The partner who is no longer in the picture should be paying child support. Not him.

BUt this is just another example of how this part of the legal system (in both countries) is heavily stacked against fathers.

This wasn't a one night stand or anything guys. This was a person who knew these women (they were friends) and decided to help them have a child that he would not be responsible for.

by your logic, uncles, family friends, etc. who become involved in a child's life also are responsible. Because thats what he represents, a family friend. Not a father.

Why isn't the other woman (the one who split) being sought for child support? Was it not THAT couple's child?

Rich, so you are saying or at least intimating that lesbian and gay couples should not have children...since their only avenues currently are through the means described in the article?

ALso, Rich, if this were the case then there would be no such thing as anonymous donors.

And to the poster before you, there was no agreement that he couldn't be in the childs life. The agreement was that he didn't HAVE to be and was not responsible for.

Answer 1

QUOTE: Bathie had changed his mind and had become involved in the child's upbringing.

Thus making him a father as well as a sperm donor. More complex case. Still don't agree; but I can see the other side

Again; I didn't say I agreed; but it does allow some argument. OBVIOUSLY the court agreed.

Answer 2

Does the law about a father's responsibility in the UK make exceptions for non-anonymous donors to a lesbian couple?

I don't think there is such a thing in the US either.

If it is an important to the UK society, then they can pass a law. But I doubt the principle of the exisiting law is being broken here at all:

If a father wants to not be responsible then he goes to a donor bank and is anonymous to the mother.

If the mother wants a donor to not be responsible he must be anonymous.

A non-related third party, such as the partner of the mother, that IS an area under dispute in the US, I have seen of custody disputes and there are probably support disputes also. I'd say that part of it is an area of evolving and unsettled law in the US and apparently in the UK too.

But regardless of whether the partner should be held responsible, it is an independent question of whether a non-anonymous father is also responsible.

Answer 3

Well since it is a lesbian couple and they both wanted the child I assume. Why isn't the non-custodial parent paying child support instead of the sperm donor?


The man that donated his sperm did it to help out friends that were unable to conceive on their own due to their lifestyle choices. The lesbian couple should be the only people held responsible for that child's well being.


This lesbian couple makes a real good example of why homosexuals shouldn't be allowed to raise children - apparently they are as confused by what their parental roles are supposed to be as their sexuality.


ADD: If the sperm donor is the father- what were the lesbian's roles in the childs life?

Answer 4

You can't pick and choose which aspects of parenthood you want to enjoy and which ones you want to discard. You are either a daddy or you aren't. You can't be a daddy when it comes to playing pickaboo for 5 minutes a day, but turn into a stranger when it comes to buying diapers. It doesn't work that way -- it's all or nothing.

Otherwise, your logic can be applied to ANY biological father. Any father could say: "Just because I donated my sperm and agree to walk with the stroller every once in a while, doesn't mean I should be forced to contribute money." Correct?

You have to take the bitter with the sweet.
----------------------
EDITED to Asker: First of all, you don't know for a fact that the other lesbian parent is not paying child support. Perhaps she is paying and not making any noise about it -- you are just assuming. Second, your "friends and acquaintances" analogy fails. Friends and acquaintances do not usually represent themselves as parents. This guy doesn't want the child to think is is just a "friend". It's an easy bet he tells the child he is the father -- doesn't he? That title comes with responsibilities, not just benefits.

Answer 5

If the agreement was that he would stay out of the child's life, and have no financial responsibility, then I can see both sides. He broke the agreement by becoming part of the child's life, so he is not longer subject to the agreement.

Answer 6

I guess I disagree with all of you, because I believe that even as the sperm donor he was immediately responsible for the child. When you create a child - directly, intentionally, indirectly, unintentionally - you are responsible for that child. it's not just a legal issue, it's a moral and logical issue. if you create a child, you do so accepting that the unexpected could occur, that those legall repsonsible might not do what they are supposed to do, and you're then morally obligated to step in. You cannot sign away that responsibility, and no one can take it on your behalf.

Answer 7

Once he became involved in his daughters life then he took on the parental reponsibilties of fatherhood. The girl looks to him as a father then he shood pay for the privelege...only if he remained detached from the girl would he have a case. Afterall cannot have his cake and eat it too.

Answer 8

I agree. I would have said he'd paid enough just giving these women the chance to have a child in the first place

Answer 9

He shouldnt be responsible and plus the lesbian couple shouldnt be allowed to have a child....

Answer 10

Shitt thats messed up.