There is a fascinating case out of Illinois where DuPage County judge Ronald Sutter has tossed out a lawsuit by Jennifer Cramblett, who sued after a sperm bank mistakenly impregnated her with sperm from an African-American rather than the white donor she selected. The result was a mixed-race baby. The response from the sperm bank was astonishing. They apologized and reportedly refunded only part of the cost to Cramblett and her partner Amanda Zinkon.
Cramblett alleges that the couple chose sperm from donor No. 380, a white man, but they were given sperm from donor No. 330, a black man. An employee simply misread the numbers. After the birth of Payton, the couple wanted to plan a second child and called the sperm bank to ask for another impregnation with the sperm of donor 380. The receptionist asked if she meant that she wanted sperm from No. 330 and asked to confirm that she wanted sperm from an African American. The error then became obvious to both her and the employee.
Cramblett is not saying that they do not love Payton, now 3, who is obviously a beautiful child. However, they insist that the sperm bank violated their agreement, impregnated her with sperm that she did not consent to, and imposed a burden on her and her family. They live in a predominantly white area of Uniontown, Ohio, and she says that there is a feeling of Payton being an “outcast” and that even haircuts are an added burden.
The mistake appears to be due to the use of paper records that allowed the misreading of the numbers — something that sounds remarkably casual and negligent.
Judge Sutter however threw out the lawsuit as lacking legal merit. The sperm bank lawyers prevailed in arguing that the only successful “wrongful birth” cases tend to be babies with severe birth defects. Sutter also rejected the claim of “breach of warranty.” In Sutter’s favor, I was surprised by the limited grounds of the complaint — particularly the absence of the obvious negligence claim. The case can be refiled with a negligence claim. It would seem that negligence is rather obvious. The question will be right to or level of injury or damages. The baby is healthy and the impregnation obviously was successful. What remains is highly controversial in treating a mixed race baby as an injury. Yet, this couple was offered and agree to impregnation with a specific man’s sperm. That raises an array of tort and contract claims that could be made. In the end, however, you are left with the notion of a baby being an injury due to its race.
She sought at least $50,000 in damages.
What do you think? Should a mother be able to recover damages for having a mixed race baby?
Source: Washington Post
What a wonderful discovery for this child to make in her later years. Your mom and mom wanted a child, but they didn’t get the one they ordered, were pissed, and sued for damages based on your falling short of their expectations.
This is closer to people who pay for a purebred dog and find out later that the father was a traveling man.
Strict liability case. AND—what an adorable baby. Most of you people –WTF is wrong with you? I love this mailing list but I hate the comments about fat, gay, whatever. Life is/will be different and harder for the baby and for for fat, gay people because of you people! A gallon of ice cream x 365 days a year wouldn’t make up for your unkindness. Like making it harder for people will somehow add to the total picture in some positive way. You’ll just what? Hate on the parents till what? They aren’t gay? She isn’t fat? I’m sure your hatin’ will help.
I’ve been under the impression one of the reasons for a sperm bank is for a ‘designer’ baby. You get a list of qualities of the donor. They are everything from eye color, to athletics, to interests. What if the couple had chosen #306 who was an extroverted circus clown. They wanted a kid who could have that tendency. Instead, they get #309 who was a geeky, introverted nuclear physicist. They wanted an extroverted clown, not an introverted geek.
You don’t give the baby back. You love it, but as a consumer, you received the wrong product. As a consumer, don’t you have recourse?
Aridog, I think it’s counterproductive to a good discussion to insult commenters even before they have commented. I think we can rise above such nonsense, no?
This seems like a strict liability case. They should be back.
Annie … I intend the term “Toad” to be insulting, considering who I am referring to and his treatment of others on threads here and elsewhere. Sorry if it bothers you. It goes back a while so you may not recall the original reason for my animus toward the “Toad.” That and I use “Toad” and “TOP” because the “Toad” himself declared he’d not join in if not “alluded to” in a comment.
I do think strict liability is the way to go. I cannot see that getting thrown out.
Don’t want no fat people round here!
“The Island of Doctor Moreau.”
Life imitating art
On the scale of America.
Lesbians commit Thoughtcrime?
Unpossible.
In any event, post-fetal abortion and a free re-pregnancy seems in order.
They could probably get some sweet sweet cash for its liver, legs and bone marrow.
I am puzzled why lesbian feminists, being misandrists and anti-hetero, would chose the BadMale sperm donor route.
Especially because IVF was invented by a DeadWhiteMale, Robert G. Edwards (awarded the Nobel Prize for it in Physiology for Medicine).
Indeed, testicles are merely a patriarchal social construct, so they should have used JustLesbian genes and Spontaneous Gay Generation.
More BadThink from this woman. Hmmm…
Aridog, a “Toad” is in the eye of the beholder. These constant negative comments on who does and who doesn’t comment on any given thread is tiresome and insulting.
I think Bettykath had a great idea and solution. Let this couple inseminate another child, but in my opinion from the same father or a different father of their choosing for free. The little girl is a precious child and to so publicly sue the company may make her feel unwanted when she gets old enough to understand. The moms probably should’ve worked harder to keep their case under wraps.
Natacha
What you have said is correct, but life is simply not the same for someone being raised by two lesbians in society, either. If you don’t find it hateful to point out the differences a black child may experience, then it should not be deemed hateful to realize that the product of a home, devoid of a father figure and headed by two lesbian parents, has some consequences for the child, as well. One of the points argued by the parents is that this mistake, on the part of the sperm bank, will cause the child to become an outcast–I would argue that even a white child, from this sperm bank, would face challenges due to the structure of the family.
Setting aside race and all of the hateful comments about the adoptive mothers’ sexual orientation and their weight, the sperm bank needs to be held accountable for their conduct. They erred and lawsuits help ensure that future errors won’t occur. Life is simply not the same for a biracial child than one who is not.
5, 4 3, 2 ….. 😀
Nick … shame on you! You just “alluded” and now the Toad may feel obligated to chime in 🙂
Some VERY interesting and thoughtful comments here. It can be seen on a daily basis that threads are defined by who does NOT comment, more often than as to who does comment.
This lawsuit does expose hypocrisy quite well in the SJW world.
As many here already said, this is first a breach of contract case, with strict liability, that should result in the sperm bank refunding all fees, court costs and ancillary direct costs and damages.
Then as a second issue, whether it is a negligence case, it could be argued that given the stakes and risks involved in their business, was reasonable to be doing bookkeeping and records keeping like this, and if not, then emotional distress and punitive damages should be awarded.
I am hoping that the simple national attention this case brought, would cause the company to go out of business.
I’m reminded of the good ole days (no sarcasm) when the American Psychiatry Association diagnosis handbook defined homosexuality as a mental defect. I doubt one could find a better “pair” of defective humans than these women to support such diagnosis.
My understanding is that homosexuals rioted their annual association meeting, resulting in the association changing their diagnosis handbook to describe homosexuality as normal. Epic fail.
One does wonder about persons so in “love” with themselves that they are only aroused by persons of the same gender.
Maybe the homosexual lobby would consider retroactive abortion in cases like this, thus paving the way for this “couple” to sacrifice their baby to their homosexual god.
BTW, if “Bitchindog” who posted earlier has a law degree, I’d hire him or her! Sassy post!
Oops, we are only partially to blame! After selecting which donor she wanted, paid her money, and waited nine months to find out how incompetent the bank. If the bank does not show the necessary skills to perform the procedure they should not be in business.