A couple of different articles about sperm donors and their potential paternity/child support obligations.
Often, I have a lot of sympathy for some men who seem to have a child support obligation that exceeds their disposable income.
However, one of the by products of our current child support laws is this..... Maybe guys think twice before crawling into bed with someone they barely know. Women tend to bare the brunt of parental responsibility when a pregnancy takes place. Having the child support laws as they are, forces men to take on some of the responsibility.
With that said, it does beg the question; if a man becomes a sperm donor for a woman who wants a baby can she waive her right to sue for child support?
It seems like a fair arrangement on it's face. But what if the mother becomes destitute and needs to go on public assistance. Why should society pay for support when they had no input on the deal that was struck? If the donor was compensated, it makes the whole thing even more egregious.
Finally, why should a sperm donor be allowed to exempt himself from child support when a man who's made it perfectly clear he doesn't want to be a father cannot.
Call me a traditionalist, but it seems to me that families are best served when there is a mommy (female) and a daddy(male) under one roof. If we have laws that encourage men to keep their sperm in their pants until they're ready to be daddy's, I think that would be a good thing.
K-Sperm probably wishes he had.
1 comment:
It is women who seek vitro, not men. Men are merely providing a service that there's a market for.
If we had no women wanting sperm donations, we would not have it.
The problem is women trying to get pregnant while being single, not going into destitute.
Post a Comment