Recommended Posts
<>
O.K then so be it. People do not have a right to have kids.
We need to think about the kids and the Needs of the kids alone are the important part of this equation not the Wants of an adult.
.
(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome
O.K then so be it. People do not have a right to have kids.
We need to think about the kids and the Needs of the kids alone are the important part of this equation not the Wants of an adult.
.
(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome
Guest
Quote> If you bring a child into this world, then you are responsible. End of.
A lot of OB-GYN's are going to get very nervous if that is ever shown to be true!
Funny you should mention that, Bill. I know some OB-GYNs who refuse to have anything to do with the OB part anymore because they can no longer afford the insurance premiums.
mh
.
"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."
Zipp0 1
[reply}
O.K then so be it. People do not have a right to have kids.
O.K then so be it. People do not have a right to have kids.
Actually, they do. Since there is no law against it, they have a right to have kids.
I could say that we have no right to chew bubblegum, since it's not in the Bill of Rights, but we do, because there isn't a law prohibiting it.
--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.
QuoteQuoteIf you bring a child into this world, then you are responsible. End of.
I totally disagree. I believe in equal rights for all.
In the USA, for the most part, a woman can have an abortion on demand. This reality is sometimes referred to as "pro-choice".
Men should have the right to have a "financial and emotional abortion" whereby they have no financial or emotional responsibility to support/raise a child. Pro-Choice goes both ways. Once the decision is made, it is irrevocable.
Equal rights cut both ways. Just because your sperm fertilized an egg shouldn't put you on the hook for 18 years of child support.
There is a case out of Colorado where a man was found liable for back child support for a kid he never knew he had. He boned some gal on a one night stand. He never saw her or heard from her again. Eight years later the State of Colorado tracked him down and took him to court. She was on welfare and the state was looking for someone to pay up. He appealed it as far as he could, but still got stuck for back and future support payments. He never saw the kid, didn't know anything about the kid, but was still liable. Completely 100% wrong. Legal, but WRONG.
I am 100% pro-choice. But pro-choice should mean that the sperm donor has equal rights to "terminate" involvement in a pregnancy and bringing up a child, same as women do. Equal rights for all.
Lets put it this way if you can't keep it in your pants and you want to play then you have to pay. It takes two to tango and you knock some one up because you did use protection. or it fails then your problemas well as hers.
It's alled responsability !!!! as for the Colarado case if she couldnt contact him to let him know it still dosnt absolve him of his responsability. Shure a guy might no know of the situation but then again he was aware of what was going on when conception took place.
My wife and I have one child together and she has a boy froma previous relation ship if we seperate I will pay support for both children not because I have to but I have been his Dad and part of my responsability as a human and a man is to make shure his need are met. it's only money after all and some times doing the right thing moraly cost less then just finical.
SO this one time at band camp.....
"Of all the things I've lost I miss my mind the most."
"Of all the things I've lost I miss my mind the most."
Sorry, that does not make it a right. That makes it acceptable.
(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome
(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome
Zipp0 1
QuoteSorry, that does not make it a right. That makes it acceptable.
Yes it does.
The 9th Ammendment:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.
QuoteMy take on the article was that, even if the sperm was donated, the guy in question pretty much acted like a parent, so the court treated him like one.
Which is why laws in different states control. IN Cali, it doesn't matter. In Steven S. v. Deborah D. (2005) 127 CA4th 319, Steven S. was the sperm donor who donated to a physician for Deborah to have a baby - even though he was married to someone else at the time. Deborah became pregnant after the insemination but later had a miscarriage. Over the next few months, Deborah and Steven had intercourse, but she failed to conceive. After she returned to her doctor for another insemination with Steven's sperm, Deborah became pregnant, and in January 2000 she gave birth to a son, Trevor. Deborah called Steven and said, "Congratulations! You're a father!' " Both she and Trevor subsequently referred to Steven as the boy's father. When Steven filed a petition in March 2003 to establish his paternity of Trevor, Deborah opposed it.
The appeals court found that the applicable public policy was spelled out in Fam C §7613(b), which protects sperm donors from liability for child support and protects women who undergo artificial insemination from future paternity claims; the statute makes no exception for a sperm donor who has had an intimate relationship with a child's mother.
So in Cali, it makes no difference.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
QuoteI kind of saw it that way too but I was not sure. It makes sense if he took a "parental role" in the childs life. So long as it is his actions and not the mere fact that he was the sperm donor then fine.
If a childless man marries a divorced mother of one and takes a parental role in the child's life, should he be responsible for support of that child in they event they divorce? (assuming he doesn't adopt the kid)
Blues,
Dave
"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)
(drink Mountain Dew)
QuoteSorry, that does not make it a right. That makes it acceptable.
I think the right to procreate falls somewhere just below the right to breathe and eat. Survival of the species and the familial line dictates that we must, if nothing else, have children. Do I think some people should be temporarily deprived of the capability based on past actions? Sure. But it would be a right they were being deprived for a specific reason.
Blues,
Dave
"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)
(drink Mountain Dew)
Richards 0
QuoteO.K then so be it. People do not have a right to have kids.
Fine.
QuoteWe need to think about the kids and the Needs of the kids alone are the important part of this equation not the Wants of an adult.
I think this would be a different scenario. I agree that when you choose to have sex you have full responsibility. I also agree that if you take on a parental role to a child that is not biologically yours, you have responsibility. I do not agree that a sperm donor should be held responsible, since this person is acting in an altruistic fashion motivated by the same interests as someone who donates blood or organs. They should not be held accountable. If a sperm donor can be held liable for child support then at the very least the state should tale responsibilty for informing the donor in advance (not the donors responsibility to find out) that by doing a good deed he may be setting himself up for at least 18 years of financial burden. There should be signs all around the clinic and not only should the person sign an acknowledgement to that effect, that acknowledgement should be a seperate document, not buried in a larger document. A stand-alone document with one statement to the effect of "Although I am an anonymous donor I acknowledge that by donating, I can be held accountable for providing child support for the child" and the peson should sign and date it. Most people would just not see that coming otherwise. The state would have an obligation to tell the guy that his good deed might not go unpunished.
My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.
Richards 0
QuoteIf a childless man marries a divorced mother of one and takes a parental role in the child's life, should he be responsible for support of that child in they event they divorce? (assuming he doesn't adopt the kid)
Tough call. I can only speak for myself, and say that if I were to marry a woman, who already had a child and I had acted as a father to that child, I would still feel that was my son/daughter after a divorce, regardless of bloodline.
As for the legality of it, I beleive that when you marry someone you assume joint liability with them (for any liability, be it debt, mortgage, child..etc). I am pretty sure that is the case but maybe one of the lawyer types on here could clear that up.
Cheers
My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.
Quotehttp://blog.pennlive.com/patriotnews/2007/05/superior_court_rules_that_male.html
Guys - if you plan on banging your lesbian friend so she and her mate can have a child, you could end up paying....
All right..this totally tops the list of all the BS in this world......Im getting so pissed off....
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites