Community Chat

[kdgn]

I have scanned two articles regarding this case and can find nothing about his name being on the birth certificate.

All I can find is the court's ruling stating that because they did not go though a physician he is responsible. At $3000 a try..... All three signed papers stating he surrendered parental rights and financial responsibility. Even now he states that he is not her parent.

I read an opinion that going through a doctor is the only way to prove that the donor wasn't actually a lover and therefore would be considered a legal father. Going through a doctor provides proper documentation.

This isn't the first time private parties have participated in AI to avoid the cost of what may well be $10,000. It doesn't always work the first time.

I hope he wins his appeal.

[kdgn]

I just finished reading a third article and the man is not on the birth certificate. The State of Kansas demanded his name when the couple split and they attempted to get State insurance for the little girl.

It is also being argued that Kansas is doing this because they do not recognize same gender couples. The co-parent isn't involved in the lawsuit at all, she is being ignored by the State. The State could be going after her for payment and they aren't.

[mgm2]

kdgn wrote: "The State could be going after her for payment and they aren't."

[Puzzle Piece]

Opinion - The man will have to pay. Rule of law - he didn't CYA and do what was legally required of a responsible man.

[JaneMarple]

On 1/24/2014 Opurrra said: His name is on the birth certificate.

Please provide a link where its stated he signed the birth certificate.

[JaneMarple]

On 1/24/2014 kdgn said:

I just finished reading a third article and the man is not on the birth certificate. The State of Kansas demanded his name when the couple split and they attempted to get State insurance for the little girl.

It is also being argued that Kansas is doing this because they do not recognize same gender couples. The co-parent isn't involved in the lawsuit at all, she is being ignored by the State. The State could be going after her for payment and they aren't.

So I see says the blind man, what a shame!

[kdgn]

"In cases where the parties do not go through a licensed physician or a clinic, there remains the question of who actually is the father of the child or children. In such cases, DCF is required by statute to establish paternity and then pursue child support from the non-custodial parent,” so says the communications director of the Kansas DCF.

[skuggles]

I just love the irony of the "laws on the books", that allow actual deadbeat dads to remain on the lam in terms of child support and uncatchable for the length of the child's dependent years, and yet make it possible to go after donors for full support who were honest as to their whereabouts and not hiding income, because they were not expecting to be on the hook.

[JaneMarple]

On 1/24/2014 skuggles said:

I just love the irony of the "laws on the books", that allow actual deadbeat dads to remain on the lam in terms of child support and uncatchable for the length of the child's dependent years, and yet make it possible to go after donors for full support who were honest as to their whereabouts and not hiding income, because they were not expecting to be on the hook.

[Sushismom]

Law or not, from what I know about this case I believe it's unjust. Might as well go after every sperm donor, too. Or surrogate mother.