Sperm donor must pay child support

[Karby]

HARRISBURG, Pennsylvania (AP) -- A state appeals court ruled that a verbal agreement between a woman and her sperm donor was invalid, and ordered the man to pay child support for the woman's twins.

The three-judge panel ruled Thursday that the deal between Joel McKiernan and Ivonne Ferguson -- in which McKiernan donated his sperm and would not be obligated to pay any support -- was unenforceable because of "legal, equitable and moral principles."

Despite an agreement that appeared to be a binding contract, the father is obligated to provide financial support, the court decided.

"It is the interest of the children we hold most dear,"' wrote Senior Judge Patrick Tamalia.

McKiernan's attorney said he may appeal.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/07/23/sp....ap/index.html

no one forced that woman to go to a sperm bank. a guy donates sperm, fine. but she was the one who wanted the kid, she was one who went to the sperm bank, she was one who wanted to get herself pregnant, and now this guy will have to pay for raising up the resulting kid on the basis of "legal, equitable and moral principles?" What principles? this is some bull.

[Seaver]

Can you say appeal? Sorry but that ruling was bullshit.

[the_marq]

So this lady just fucked up the whole sperm donor program for everyone.

You'd have to be a moron to donate sperm now...and then they wouldn't want you. Paging Captain Yossarian.

[Cynthetiq]

that's just lame, but it sounds like she bypassed going to an actual sperm bank facility.

[MooseMan3000]

...

blink, blink.

...


If that was the whole story, I would say I've lost faith in our legal system.

HOWEVER.

The two knew each other beforehand. They had a two year long affair. They entered an agreement where he was going to donate sperm and she was going to be insemenated with said sperm. It's not as if he anonymously donated the sperm and some random woman asked him to pay child support. It was, in effect, their illegitimate child.

If that man in good conscience agreed to donate the sperm when he knew that the woman would not be able to support to child(ren), he SHOULD be forced to pay child support.

[ARTelevision]

The family courts will have to assign legal fatherhood in this case and really in all cases - they're all about that - especially in support-related cases. I don't see any way around it. I spent a lot of years involved in child-custody stuff and you don't want to get me started on that - especially the way fatherhood is...um, treated by the family courts. But I can see this sort of thing as inevitable.

[MooseMan3000]

Originally posted by ARTelevision
The family courts will have to assign legal fatherhood in this case and really in all cases - they're all about that - especially in support-related cases. I don't see any way around it. I spent a lot of years involved in child-custody stuff and you don't want to get me started on that - especially the way fatherhood is...um, treated by the family courts. But I can see this sort of thing as inevitable.

I assume you mean that the father is held responsible for nearly everything, even if he doesn't appear to be.

I have to say that I'm biased in the other direction, because my parents divorced 7 or 8 years ago, and my dad was given a reasonable child support and custody package. He is an attorney, and he makes a reasonable income, and the child support he was going to have to pay for myself and my younger sister was well within his budget. However, it was supposed to be paid on a monthly basis, and after all these years he's paid his monthly requirement roughly 3 times. My mother is a high school teacher, and she certainly cannot afford to support her children alone, but the courts haven't seen fit to force my father to pay. As such, my mother is selling her house, and she now has 3 part time jobs to try to stay afloat.

Man, those family courts sure do put too much burden on the father. [/sarcasm]

[sexymama]

Read the entire article. This man was stupid to not put the agreement in writing. He knew the woman for two years. They had an affair that was ending. He must have known that she couldn't be totally trusted. Plus, she says they never made the agreement. This is clearly a case of he said/she said and we'll never know the exact truth.

As for messing up sperm banks -- it should have no effect as this is a completely different situation.

[World's King]

There is one more part of American life that's now discreidted.

[ARTelevision]

http://www.acfc.org/

MooseMan3000, thanks for the sarcasm. duly noted.
I acknowledge and respect your anecdotal experience.

In any event, it's well enough known that family courts are self-avowedly biased toward mothers. It's a tradition that extended from its cultural roots directly into law.

In any event, the courts will assess fatherhood obligations to sperm donors - I do not doubt that.
That's the point of the thread.

[Averett]

Sperm donor must pay child support
HARRISBURG, Pennsylvania (AP) -- A state appeals court ruled that a verbal agreement between a woman and her sperm donor was invalid, and ordered the man to pay child support for the woman's twins.

The three-judge panel ruled Thursday that the deal between Joel McKiernan and Ivonne Ferguson -- in which McKiernan donated his sperm and would not be obligated to pay any support -- was unenforceable because of "legal, equitable and moral principles."

Despite an agreement that appeared to be a binding contract, the father is obligated to provide financial support, the court decided.

"It is the interest of the children we hold most dear,"' wrote Senior Judge Patrick Tamalia.

McKiernan's attorney said he may appeal.

The decision could have implications for sperm and egg donors who expect anonymity, said Arthur Caplan, a professor and medical ethicist at the University of Pennsylvania.

"Anybody who is a sperm donor ought to understand that their identity could be made known to any child that's produced, and they could be seen by the courts as the best place to go to make sure the child has adequate financial support," he said Friday.

According to the trial judge's opinion, Ferguson and McKiernan met while working together and had a two-year affair. The relationship waned by late 1993, when Ferguson convinced McKiernan to act as a sperm donor with no responsibility for any child born as a result, the opinion said.

McKiernan, who has paid up to $1,520 a month in support since losing the case at trial, said he was not pleased with the ruling, but declined to comment further.

Ferguson's lawyer, Elizabeth Hoffman, said there was never evidence of an agreement between the two in which McKiernan would not have to pay any support.

"There was no evidence except his word and her word and it was a matter of credibility," he said.

Please quote the full article next time. Just that little bit you pasted missed quite a lot of information.

[StormBerlin]

Originally posted by MooseMan3000
...

blink, blink.

...


If that was the whole story, I would say I've lost faith in our legal system.

HOWEVER.

The two knew each other beforehand. They had a two year long affair. They entered an agreement where he was going to donate sperm and she was going to be insemenated with said sperm. It's not as if he anonymously donated the sperm and some random woman asked him to pay child support. It was, in effect, their illegitimate child.

If that man in good conscience agreed to donate the sperm when he knew that the woman would not be able to support to child(ren), he SHOULD be forced to pay child support.

Yep.

[pocon1]

Never trust women.

[ariekitten]

i think rulings that lean toward pressing hard on legal fathers or not also depends ALOT on the state you're living in. while Mooseman has experienced the courts' lack of enforcement, others have experienced where the courts are too harsh on the legal fathers.

i know a guy who is having a kid with his gf but now she doesn't want anything to do with the guy, yet he has been devoted to the relationship and the developing baby the whole time. he's now going to hafta fight for custody rights, and they are trying to really rob him as far as the child support goes.

texas seems to be a state where they're not consistent from one case to another....

but as far as that sperm donating case, i think he should hafta pay at least something because he donated non-annonymously to a woman he had already had relations with, and he never got it in writing that he would be duty-free. *shrug* but still that woman shouldn't have done what she did.