Skip to main content

View Diary: Kansas seems intent on punishing LGBT couples and now their sperm donors. (19 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The women signed a legal contract (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Karl Rover, decembersue

    releasing the sperm donor from all responsibility. He is not a "deadbeat father", he's a sperm donor.

    “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

    by skohayes on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 04:41:06 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  The woman can't (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kscatlvr2001

      sign away a child's right to child support. This really matters when the mother seeks welfare benefits for the child.

      •  You are right (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        chipoliwog, pistolSO

        the interest in question (medicaid payments etc) belongs to the state, not the individual.

        While Kansas is being, well, pissy to say the least, it's not legally out-of-bounds.  However, if they have not done this with respect to anyone else the state is aware of who has used a donor there may be an equal protection issue.

        If you think you're too small to be effective, you've never been in the dark with a mosquito.

        by marykk on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 08:21:09 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  As I see it, they had two opportunities. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kscatlvr2001, marykk

          They could have solicited the "donation" through an agency that does these. At which point it really would have been a donation, and he would have no status as a biological father.

          But I'm guessing they didn't want to pay fees. I'm not very sympathetic to people whose excuse is "it cost too much".

          Then, they could have started adoption proceedings by the second lesbian, which would have required the man to relinquish his parental rights. We can assume that he'd be willing, given the circumstances. This would have the added benefit of making the other woman the child's "second mother".

          They did not do this either. I suspect rather strongly that the excuse is again "it costs too much".

          This isn't a story of the big bad evil state of Kansas screwing with people for shits and giggles, this is the case of dumbass Craigslist turkey baster sperm donations and people who willfully and foolishly ignored well-established law.

      •  really? clinics do this all the time. (0+ / 0-)

        if a legal contract is signed, what is the difference if it's between individuals or a clinic?

        And have you read the contract?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site