Why the hell do I need a sperm donor when I donate enough already on my bedroom wall??? Those posters aren't going to stay up by themselves you know?
It doesn't have to be private or anonymous. The Kansas law they are trotting out is that for it to be considered a 'donation' the insemination had to have been done by a physician. In this case the lesbian couple used a syringe. (Can we get a collective 'ewww' going?)
What about the woman who did a bj and saved the sperm and inseminated herself later? I remember we had a thread about that.
This seems like a case that is about contract law. It sounds like the "father" didn't really understand KS law in this regard and essentially entered into a poorly written contract. I don't really see this as much difference than assignment of liability in any other dispute.
Per the article - the lesbian couple petitioned the state for aid to raise the child. I'm sure the state won't turn away aid for an innocent child. So who pays? The biological father or the taxpayer? I'm thinking most taxpayers in KS would rather the biological father pay rather than foot the bill themselves.
Well, he already had a contract wherein all parties agreed he is not responsible. But KS law states that he is since they make a distinction between physician and non-physician inseminations. But let's say he had a contract that states they must take the sperm and get it inseminated by a doctor... but they still don't. The contract is still there but the second situation still breaks the KS law. So he's still the 'father' and financially responsible. Which is just wrong all around.
Maybe in KS since they are backasswards. But if it were me I'd rather the state pay. I would share that burden rather than break the ethics of the situation.
No pun intended but Sounds like KS is trying to 'artificially' create and support an industry This law does NOTHING but forces people to pay for services which they could get on their own when you start running out of markets. . .you create them with bullsh!t laws Rocket River
The contract though clearly missed out on one key facet of KS law and good contracts should cover that. If the contract did though state that insemination had to be conducted by a doctor and they didn't do it while KS law might still force him to pay child support he probably has good grounds to sue the mothers for violating the terms of the contract. I am not a lawyer though and am wondering what any of the clutchfans legal eagles have to say. MadMax, SamFisher, Refman?
This sounds really shady on the government side. Extorting a name and then prosecuting him like a criminal? This is another case of the government stepping into personal life.
Or for the woman not to open her legs and acceot said penis. Still doesnt change the fact that the system is rigged against men in most cases. Check that almost all cases.
