Becky
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 01 Jan 2006 Posts: 6230 Location: London, England
Thanks: 0
Thanked:7
|
Should This Man Be Made to Pay?
Posted: 12-28-07 03:11am
|
|
|
|
| The Guardian Newspaper
wrote: |
Sperm
donor to lesbian couple forced to pay
child support
A firefighter who donated sperm to a
lesbian couple said yesterday that he was
being made to pay child support for their
son and daughter, in a case believed to be
the first of its kind in Britain.
Andy Bathie, 37, said the women, who
approached him five years ago after other
male friends declined to become donors,
assured him he would have no personal or
financial involvement in the children's
upbringing. But he said the Child Support
Agency contacted him last November and
made him take a £400 paternity test, then
demanded support payments because the
couple had split up.
Legally, only men who donate sperm through
licensed fertility clinics do not become
the father of any children conceived using
their donation.
Proposed legislation, at committee stage
in the House of Lords before passing to
the Commons, would give equal parenting
rights, including financial
responsibilities, to both members of same
sex couples, but the change will come too
late for Bathie, who is lobbying for the
laws to be made retrospective and for him
not to be seen as the legal parent of the
children, now aged two and four.
"These women wanted to be parents and take
on the responsibilities that brings. I
would never have agreed to this unless
they had been a committed family. And now
I can't afford to have children with my
own wife - it's crippling me financially,"
he told the Evening Standard.
At the time of his donation, Bathie was in
a relationship with a woman who was not
planning to have children, but he has
since married someone else.
"I did look into the legal side and
understood that as a couple they would be
the parents, not me. I was never daddy.
They wanted children as a couple, which
means they should take responsibility. The
CSA admit that mine is an unusual case -
this is double standards."
A spokeswoman for the CSA said: "Unless
the child is legally adopted, both
biological parents are financially
responsible; the Child Support Agency
legislation is not gender or partnership
based.
Natalie Gamble, a fertility law expert at
Lester Aldridge, who has advised Bathie,
said the case was the first of its kind
she had come across. "Currently a
non-birth mother in this situation is not
automatically recognised as the parent in
law, so she is not financially
responsible. If the law being proposed was
to apply in Andy's case, his
responsibility for the child would be
passed to the non-birth mother."
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology
Authority warned that "DIY" donors using
methods such as unlicensed websites or
home insemination were financially liable
for their offspring.
Phil Willis MP, chairman of the
innovation, universities and skills select
committee, which deals with human
fertilisation and research, said: "The CSA
has to look very carefully at the issue. I
suspect he won't get his money back, as
there would be a flood of similar
applications."
|
source: htt
p://www.guardian.co.uk/gayrights/story/0,,
2221460,00.html
Do you
think he should pay Child Support?
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Rodge
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 25 Feb 2006 Posts: 905 Location: , England, UK
Thanks: 1
Thanked:0
|
Posted: 12-28-07 05:59am
|
|
|
|
|
Well, given that he was not and never has
been in a sexual relationship with either
of the women involved, I'm gonna say no.
However, I can see where the CSA is coming
from, because they can't legally ask the
non-birth mother to pay for her kids, and
he is their biological parent. I guess
we'll just have to get that legislation
passed as quickly as possible.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Jincks013
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Apr 2007 Posts: 1180 Location: ,
Thanks: 23
Thanked:13
|
Posted: 12-28-07 06:01am
|
|
|
|
|
I'd say is there a signed agreement
relieving him of financial obligations?
Obviously he should not pay support since
parents were already in place. It is cases
like this that change laws. laws do not
change themselves they require a
motivator. This should be taken to court;
at the least the lady who has custody
should return his money every month.
This was a preset agreements opting him
out of any financial obligations agreed
upon by the three legal adults present.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Rodge
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 25 Feb 2006 Posts: 905 Location: , England, UK
Thanks: 1
Thanked:0
|
Posted: 12-28-07 06:05am
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, they really should have put it in
writing.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Mommy35
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 23 Sep 2006 Posts: 3165 Location: Vacationland, USA,
|
Posted: 12-28-07 15:22pm
|
|
|
|
|
He should have got something in writing
stating he wouldn't have to pay support or
be responsible for the child at all.
Since he is currently paying support he
should have every right to the child that
the mother has.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12984
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
|
Posted: 12-28-07 15:39pm
|
|
|
|
|
Absolutely NOT. He shouldn't have to pay a
dime, and that woman OWES him back any
money he paid to her. In fact, she owes
him money for the strain she is causing to
his own marriage and the unhappiness he
and his wife are experiencing due to not
being able to have children of their own.
This is another case of a woman being a
life-sucking leech - it's sickening and I
am ashamed of my own gender.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Birch
Moderator
Joined: 07 Nov 2005 Posts: 4159 Location: Bliss,
Thanks: 159
Thanked:16
|
Another Good Reason to Support Gay Marriage.
Posted: 12-28-07 18:53pm
|
|
|
|
|
Are the two kids going to be very poorly
off if he doesn't pay anything? Isn't
that the foremost important detail here?
Sure, he should've...they
should've...whatever. But they didn't,
and now there are two kids to take care
of. That's too bad that he can't
financially have kids of his own with his
wife, but here are two kids in the flesh
that need his help now.
(They should be going after "wife" #2.)
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12984
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
|
Posted: 12-28-07 20:02pm
|
|
|
|
|
Ppft, no. In my opinion, it's the current
legal mother's responsibility to care for
those children and if they are wearing
rags and starving because SHE can't care
for them then they need to go into foster
care. It is NONE of the man's business and
he shouldn't have been dragged into it
like this. It's despicable. There is NO
excuse for this kind of behavior this
woman is doing.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
kaerbear
Most Diplomatic Poster
Joined: 10 Apr 2007 Posts: 1557 Location: ,
|
Posted: 12-28-07 22:34pm
|
|
|
|
|
He should have been careful enough to make
himself familiar with the laws regarding
his rights and responsibilities. You're
talking about creating a human life with
someone and that should be taken
seriously. Obviously his intentions were
good but he should have thought ahead. It
is pretty sick that the woman is trying to
get support from him. It just goes to
show that not everyone deserves to have
kids and just the desire to have a child
of your own doesn't automatically mean you
will be a responsible or conscientious
parent.
Now they are making an example of him.
Hopefully people will benefit from his
mistake by preparing themselves better and
avoiding a similar situation.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12984
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
|
Posted: 12-28-07 23:50pm
|
|
|
|
|
HOPEFULLY laws will go in place so people
like him don't have to be careful of
sneaky, leech-like women who want to suck
their wallets dry.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Birch
Moderator
Joined: 07 Nov 2005 Posts: 4159 Location: Bliss,
Thanks: 159
Thanked:16
|
Posted: 12-29-07 13:22pm
|
|
|
|
|
| Eiri
wrote: | | Ppft, no. In my opinion,
it's the current legal mother's
responsibility to care for those children
and if they are wearing rags and starving
because SHE can't care for them then they
need to go into foster care. It is NONE of
the man's business and he shouldn't have
been dragged into it like this. It's
despicable. There is NO excuse for this
kind of behavior this woman is
doing. |
I would rip kids
away from the only family they have ever
known and place them in the mess of a
foster care system as an absolute last
resort, and it sounds like legally and
ethically there are other options.
Maybe the woman's excuse is that the kids
will suffer, and until we know more
details I'd like to lean towards that.
Why assume firstly that the woman is a
blood sucking leech? I'd rather give her
the benefit of the doubt.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12984
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
|
Posted: 12-29-07 13:47pm
|
|
|
|
|
I'd rip kids away from an incompetent
mother period. The "father" is not a
father in this story. He is just a sperm
donor. He shouldn't even be involved; but
that sick woman went "Waaah I'm single and
can't be bothered to go to the government
for help; let me take the sneaky route and
betray the trust of the man who gave the
sperm to make my children!! According to
the law I can suck money out of him for
the rest of my children's lives!"
Men get their money stolen from them every
day because the government always gives
the woman the "benefit of the doubt"
because of course, the Maternal Instinct
must be making the right decisions!!!
FAH!!!
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Rodge
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 25 Feb 2006 Posts: 905 Location: , England, UK
Thanks: 1
Thanked:0
|
Posted: 12-29-07 13:52pm
|
|
|
|
|
Eiri, nothing in the article says she's
incompetent. A case can be made for her
being greedy, but I don't think greedy =
bad mother who deserves to have her kids
taken away.
| Quote: |
tr> | Men get their
money stolen from them every day because
the government always gives the woman the
"benefit of the doubt" because of course,
the Maternal Instinct must be making the
right decisions!!!
FAH!!! |
Also... what? This is a
very unusual case, the guy even says so.
What does the 'maternal instinct' have to
do with it?
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Birch
Moderator
Joined: 07 Nov 2005 Posts: 4159 Location: Bliss,
Thanks: 159
Thanked:16
|
Posted: 12-29-07 13:54pm
|
|
|
|
|
I try very hard not to generalize and make
assumptions about people before knowing
all the details lest it happen to me one
day.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12984
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
|
Posted: 12-29-07 20:08pm
|
|
|
|
|
| Rodge
wrote: | Eiri, nothing in the article
says she's incompetent. A case can be made
for her being greedy, but I don't think
greedy = bad mother who deserves to have
her kids taken away.
| Quote: |
tr> | Men get their
money stolen from them every day because
the government always gives the woman the
"benefit of the doubt" because of course,
the Maternal Instinct must be making the
right decisions!!!
FAH!!! |
Also... what? This is a
very unusual case, the guy even says so.
What does the 'maternal instinct' have to
do with it? |
I do, but that's just me.
The maternal instinct is a reference to
the fact that courts always seem to favor
the mother in custody and other battles
involving children. It's the "mommy" so
she must be right, obviously! Thank god
this is changing as Brittany Spears and
K-fed show - The dad actually got the kids
in this case. But especially in cases
involving sucking money from the low-life
male, the woman almost always wins because
she "trots out the toddler", aka she plays
the "think about the children!" card and
she gets all the pity.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Jincks013
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Apr 2007 Posts: 1180 Location: ,
Thanks: 23
Thanked:13
|
Posted: 12-31-07 08:11am
|
|
|
|
|
Ya thank your god men can kidnap your
children for two years; hide out with them
and you don't have a single freaking idea
where they are; employing P.I's don't work
either; then all of a sudden you have a
custody order; divorce; and two years of
back support .... ya I know the woman this
happened to.
Don't play the "women always win" card
because THEY DON"T.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12984
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
|
Posted: 12-31-07 12:03pm
|
|
|
|
|
If we looked up cases just from this
century, I'd bet way more than half of
them rule in favor of the mother. It
wouldn't be a stereotype or an issue if
there wasn't truth to it.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Cambion
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 08 Nov 2005 Posts: 747
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
|
Posted: 12-31-07 16:31pm
|
|
|
|
|
Women can be conniving b*tches, especially
when it comes to having kids. Even women
who conceive through sperm banks can use
dishonest means to obtain information
about the donor they chose and try to
solicit money from them.
I don't think the guy should have to pay a
red cent to this fool woman, and
personally I think the woman ought to be
taken out behind the nearest building and
shot for being so greedy and stupid. The
woman probably just talked sweet to the
guy and had every intention of burying her
claws into his wallet from the start -
hell, for all I know, she just wanted to
get knocked up so she'd have some free
money coming in from the father.
The guy is a little dense for giving in to
this woman's request, but the fault lies
more on the woman. If I were the guy, I'd
be suing her for emotional distress at the
very least.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12984
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
|
Posted: 12-31-07 23:17pm
|
|
|
|
|
I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels
that way, Cambion! I was feeling
outnumbered!
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Jincks013
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Apr 2007 Posts: 1180 Location: ,
Thanks: 23
Thanked:13
|
Posted: 01-01-08 08:04am
|
|
|
|
|
| Eiri
wrote: | | If we looked up cases just
from this century, I'd bet way more than
half of them rule in favor of the mother.
It wouldn't be a stereotype or an issue if
there wasn't truth to
it. |
OK.. I'll bite.. PROVE that being a woman
is why they were given custody.
I'll even give you a few days.
|
|
|
|
|