Gay sperm donor told to pay child maintenance for 'his' two children

areyawell

How stupid was he, if he was going to do this correctly he should have going down the proper legal route

Madam_X

He made a mistake by doing something very generous - no need to nail him to the ****ing cross.

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

Substitute Basildon for Tallagh and no one here would give a fvck.

Speak for yourself. And Basildon is also a really tough area so what's your point?

Plenty of reasons why the gay should pay.

"The gay" lol. There there, no need to be that freaked out by his sexual orientation.

FairytaleGirl

a contract should have been drawn up beforehand to protect both parties.

Rookie mistake!

YFlyer

So he went clubbing with his wingman Shaun Keeble and got chatting to your wan.

B.A._Baracus

FairytaleGirl wrote: »

a contract should have been drawn up beforehand to protect both parties.

Rookie mistake!

Sadly you are right.
I think this story is just another example of 'trust no one' in life.

Dangerous Man

areyawell wrote: »

How stupid was he, if he was going to do this correctly he should have going down the proper legal route

Is legal route a euphemism?

areyawell

Dangerous Man wrote: »

Is legal route a euphemism?

You know what I mean, but trying to act smart about it

Scioch

areyawell wrote: »

You know what I mean, but trying to act smart about it

Careful now, he's a Dangerous Man. How ya keepin anyway ? Are ya well ?

jill_valentine

What would be the legal route...? Buying in from abroad I suppose?

Thinking about it now, I'd actually find it unlikely that it was possibly to legally disclaim fatherhood, so "signing something" might not have been an option.

areyawell

jill_valentine wrote: »

What would be the legal route...? Buying in from abroad I suppose?

Thinking about it now, I'd actually find it unlikely that it was possibly to legally disclaim fatherhood, so "signing something" might not have been an option.

Yes something like a sperm bank where the fathers have no legal responsibility for the child produced from the sperm. Also if they contacted solicitors and got them to draw up Legal contracts which they both signed would also work. Kinda like a Pre-Nupt if you get me

Also she could have going on holiday and banged a load of strangers.

jill_valentine

areyawell wrote: »

Yes something like a sperm bank where the fathers have no legal responsibility for the child produced from the sperm. Also if they contacted solicitors and got them to draw up Legal contracts which they both signed would also work. Kinda like a Pre-Nupt if you get me

Also she could have going on holiday and banged a load of strangers.

a) In the UK though? I'm pretty sure they have particularly strict paternity laws, as previously noted, I'm not sure you could voluntarily "renounce" your paternity for these purposes, at least not then.

b) She's a lesbian, so that's not an option.

Interesting bit from the Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2012/oct/26/gay-sperm-donor-pay-child-support-maintenance

"Had the donation taken place after April 2009, or through a clinic, the law would have viewed his responsibility very differently. In that case he would not be deemed the father, provided the consenting couple to which he was making the donation were in a civil partnership, or his donation to the couple was through a licensed clinic. The fact that it was made on a private basis before that date means the law is very clear. He is considered the father."

It seems he's fallen afoul of an oversight, I mean there does seem to be legislation in the spirit of preventing exactly this situation in place now.

Shouldn't the CSA be pursuing the other mom?

Dangerous Man

areyawell wrote: »

You know what I mean, but trying to act smart about it

For ****'s sake. Has AH lost it's sense of humour lately or what? It's a ****ing joke.

minidazzler

bluecode wrote: »

He should pay up. They are HIS children any way you look at it. Yes he made a mistake like many a man gay or straight. But the kids are his and to me that implies taking a certain level of responsibility for that.

At the same time I don't understand why you wouldn't want to have some part of their lives. I have two boys. I would hate to think they would be strangers to me. They are part of me as much as they are part of their Mother.

It's pretty much black and white with me. He needs to shut up and pay up.

So because you can't understand where he is coming from he should have to pay? Eh, that's stupid.

They made an agreement whereby he would give her sperm so she could raise kids herself because she wanted them. It's not like a one night stand because there was an agreement based on set terms that worked out well up until recently.

Being is biologically their father, but he's not their dad. It was stupid not to get terms put down on paper. But he shouldn't have to pay when that woman is the one who said she wanted kids and he was just helping her out.

If I was asked I'd donate sperm, but I'd make damn sure I have all the legal side sorted so I don't end up being responsible for kids I don't consider to be mine.

It's my sperm, not my kid.

4zn76tysfajdxp

My name is URL wrote: »

Gay sperm is capable of fertilizing gay eggs.. what kind of sick science is this?!

They're making gay babies! :eek::eek::eek::eek:

Kirby

Biology really doesn't come into it in my book. He didn't want children, he didn't raise them. He was merely a donor.

They aren't his. They are hers and her partner's. The responsibility lies with them.

philologos

Kirby wrote: »

Biology really doesn't come into it in my book. He didn't want children, he didn't raise them. He was merely a donor.

They aren't his. They are hers and her partner's. The responsibility lies with them.

But surely the fact that we even have this case shows that biology has a lot to do with it.

It shows the murky water of meddling with biology surely.

ElleEm

I agree that they are the responsibility of the mother and her partner. They needed sperm, not a daddy for the kids.

Obviously things didn't work out how the mother would have liked so now she is seeking financial support. I think she is out of order!

rochey84

Renee Hollow Plow wrote: »

They're making gay babies! :eek::eek::eek::eek:

Us gays call them gaybies!!! :P:P:P

Handsome Bob

The chap was played, regardless of his own shortsightedness and naivety.

jill_valentine

She wasn't running some kind of long con though like, I mean she just wanted children. The kids are mostly grown now and as far as we can gather she wasn't actually trying to claim from him, she just claimed from the state when her circumstances changed and they went after him.

I wouldn't say this kind of arrangement is commonplace exactly, but it does happen plenty. The father can be involved as a dad to some extent, or not. It's much simpler than using a sperm bank and much much easier than adoption, and you have a lot more control over the circumstances. For it to end like this is by no means the rule, I mean there are families from this sort of set up happily going about their day all over the country and world; you just don't hear about them.

The problem is all the legal small print, and it seems pretty baffling to me that the laws which could have resolved all this aren't applied retroactively.

MagicSean

jill_valentine wrote: »

a) In the UK though? I'm pretty sure they have particularly strict paternity laws, as previously noted, I'm not sure you could voluntarily "renounce" your paternity for these purposes, at least not then.

b) She's a lesbian, so that's not an option.

Interesting bit from the Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2012/oct/26/gay-sperm-donor-pay-child-support-maintenance



It seems he's fallen afoul of an oversight, I mean there does seem to be legislation in the spirit of preventing exactly this situation in place now.

Shouldn't the CSA be pursuing the other mom?

Being a lesbian doesnt render her incapable of sex with men.

jill_valentine

MagicSean wrote: »

Being a lesbian doesnt render her incapable of sex with men.

It renders the possibility effectively beyond consideration.

shopaholic01

Abi wrote: »

This is where the whole plan went to shít, she named the father and obviously gave an address for him. If she didn't want him to get financially involved she shouldn't have tried to claim for dependent children. If you try to claim for children you're legally obliged to seek maintenance and declare it to the welfare department you're claiming from.

CSA are chasing him because of a boo-boo she made, and a costly one at that for him.

This is the nasty bit - she was willing to accept his sperm and acknowledge his non-involvement. Then, her relationship breaks down and she needs financial assistance. It would have been explained to her that the biological father was legally responsible. He was a former friend who had donated sperm and trusted her, and she proceeds to give his details.

She could have lied and said the children were a result of one night stands. I feel sorry for others in a similar situation.

Links234

philologos wrote: »

It could be because he is the child's father? Biologically that's exactly what he is irrespective of how it came about.

This is why divorcing biological parenthood from social parenthood is generally a bad idea.

So in your books the biological parents of adopted children should have to pay child support?