[BetteBoop]

I find it odd that Kansas officials are trying to exploit a loophole in the law to get child support from a man who donated sperm.

Clearly both he and the child's parents agreed that he would have no role in the child's life, including financially but the state disagrees.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/breakin...6-1226546787801

Do you think sperm or egg donors should have any responsibility (financial or personal) to offspring conceived with their donations?

[RobotFerretOfDoo...]

Financial, definitely not.

But I do think there is a measure of personal responsibility. I think that a child should have the right to at least know who their biological parent is.

[Oriental lily]

This case is different due to them 'doing the deed to conceive'

So his 'donation' was done the traditional way.

Very silly and risky behavior on behalf of the male.

It really only comes down to their word against his.

no legal contracts ect would have been done. Unlike when done through an agency.

But no if done correctly I don't think a doner should have any finacial or emotional obligation.

Which is the norm if done correctly.

[Chedasha]

This case is different due to them 'doing the deed to conceive'

So his 'donation' was done the traditional way.

Very silly and risky behavior on behalf of the male.

It really only comes down to their word against his.

no legal contracts ect would have been done. Unlike when done through an agency.

But no if done correctly I don't think a doner should have any finacial or emotional obligation.

Which is the norm if done correctly.

Exactly.

A donor through a clinic has no financial obligations. They are ID release in Australia now so at 16-18 information can be obtained on them.

[HurryUpAlready]

Financial, definitely not.

But I do think there is a measure of personal responsibility. I think that a child should have the right to at least know who their biological parent is.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[BetteBoop]

OL, the story refers to an agreement between the donor and the parents. I read that to mean that they have a written agreement. And even if they don't, the parents don't want him to support the child so there's verbal agreement.

It's not clear how he donated. The story only says they didn't go through a licenced doctor. They could have used a turkey baster for all we know.

But assuming they had sex, should that affect his responsibility anyway?

[Oriental lily]

At the bottom it said they dd not use artificial insemination?

What's weird is why the mums just didint say 'father unknown' on official documents.

A little snippet that is unlikely to tell the full story.
The whole story is a bit bizarre and odd as it stands.

[auntied]

It doesn't say they did the deed. It says they didn't use a doctor. Potentially very different. It also doesn't say if they had a legal contract drawn up.

Personal responsibility to meet child and provide some answers sure, at the right time.

Financial repsonsibility no - it was never the intention and the man was never a parent.

[Chocolate Addict]

It's not clear how he donated. The story only says they didn't go through a licenced doctor. They could have used a turkey baster for all we know.

Really??.....

A SPERM donor in Kansas is fighting a state effort to force him to pay child support for a child conceived through artificial insemination by a lesbian couple.

Very first line of the article.

I have no idea what is the right thing. It sounds like they didn't go through the right process, ie the laws of that state saying IE must be done by a Doctor. You would think they would have gotten that right.

[LeChatNinjah]

**** no, he donated with no expectations of responsibility, he has none.

Very different from accidentally donating during a one night stand and going oops.