We have been following cases where sperm donors have been held for child support or alternatively sought parental rights. The latest such case is out of Kansas where the state is pursuing a sperm donor for child support. William Marotta responded to an advertisement by a lesbian couple to donate sperm, but, after the couple split up, the state insisted on being given his name as the father and pursued him for monthly support payments.
Angela Bauer and her former partner, Jennifer Schreiner, put the advertisement on Craig’s list in March 2009 and Marotta decided to help out. Recently he was told that the Kansas Department for Children and Families (DCF) recently compelled Bauer to reveal the name as a condition for state support. Since the state does not recognize same-sex marriage, the couple had to adopt the child. They adopted a total of eight children during over the course of their relationship. This appears the only child by artificial insemination. The couple elected to artificially inseminate Schreiner. Bauer cannot support the child without state support due to an illness. The state said that if the parents did not reveal the donor’s name, it would withhold health benefits. Marotta, a 46-year-old machinist, believes that the state is actually targeting him out of hostility for same-sex couples.
Ironically, since the state does not recognize same-sex marriage, it cannot collect child support from the women.
Marotta signed an agreement relinquishing all legal claims to the child but the state insists that this does not relieve him of child support obligations. He is fighting the agency action though he is facing high legal costs.
Source: Washington Post
68 thoughts on “Kansas Demands Child Support Payments From Sperm Donor”
Regarding multitasking. The ultimate multitask is to make a solo instrument approach to a busy airport in a multi-engine airplane in hardball instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) with an engine acting up, the wings icing up and only a quarter mile visibility. It is disconcerting as well to have the tower ask me if I “want equipment.” That is tower talk for calling the fire trucks out to the runway.
Been there, done that, and have the cap and T-shirt.
Not a cop, per se, but more than passing familiarity with law enforcement and the legal system. Want to know more about me? Here is the short version of my bio, and I have thrown in a photo at no extra charge.
Mike Appleton, all LAW is off when you’re dealing with these child support agencies. They not only make up the law on their own, but they do things without court orders to start with. They send bogus paperwork to employers, and even federal agencies, that are inadequate and insufficient from a legal standpoint, and they intimidate other agencies into bending to their will, and they snatch people’s money without even the amount of paperwork and legal backing that the IRS needs to show to place a levy. They’re agencies gone mad with power. This had to happen because they were given the right to skip due process “a little bit here and there” to make it harder to get welfare, and so they were combining their powers against people who didn’t have the wherewithal to get together to get a class action against government agencies started. And they get four billion dollars a year to figure out new ways to cheat. Nobody will look into their unlawful conduct because ultimately there are judges behind the whole thing hiding their own loosey-goosey stuff that is all buried under layers of secrecy in the family courts.
As gene has stated…. It’s the sperm donor that’s on the hook…. Unless they have someone to step up to the plate….. It all boils down to who has the money in reality…. Not necessarily the ability to pay….. This is true even when the state has terminated your rights to a child…. They can still force you to pay support…. Even if tricked into pregnancy…..they will come or the money…. Unless the state has some other interest like recognizing a marriage ….. Even if its not the child of the husband…. The state will make him pay…. Why… Because they can….
My tense of “there’s” is obviously wrong. I should pay more attention when I switch from one to many. I’ll blame it on the ease of “V”, “C, and “X”, and computers in general.
” I do have other skills and am capable of multitasking” , but of course, if your only skills were English and Drama, you’d likely be waiting tables (a good server at a high-end restaurant can make $100K, so maybe that’s not a bad thing). We all have skills beyond our major or minor in College, though some are restricted, even constipated, by College.
However, I’m replying more to the multitasking (which gives some indication of relative age). A good example of, and the problem with, multitasking is driving while on the cellphone and eating a hamburger. You have visual, tactile, aural, and taste all in interplay. Good multitasking, but I think the one task you should be focusing on isn’t in your ear or your mouth. Studies (oh that claim of authority by study) haven’t shown multitasking as meaning all tasks are done well, but more most tasks are done poorly. For those of you that can’t understand “all” versus “most”, the “most” means one might be done well, but all the others are likely done poorly. If you’re truly multitasking, there might be none done well.
There’s these arguments about predators, plains of Africa, and maybe butt displays, but I have no idea as to the weight of these arguments regarding focus versus multitasking and getting the job done well.
Comments are closed.