[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Nedusa

Yes, I've read a bit more about this and it seems the man in question had no formal legal disclaimer/agreement in place and merely offered his sperm casually to these women who were close friends of his. In this situation the law is not at all clear and as we have seen he is now still considered to be the birth father and responsible for these children ie for child maintenance.

I suspect deep down he probably liked the idea of knowing the children were his and even though he had no legal rights on the children, being their birth father he still has a moral duty of care.

The women involved in this should have used sperm from a normal sperm bank and not someone they were friendly with and who would inevitably "know" the children.

If he does have to pay for their upkeep then he should have the right to be named the father on the Birth certificate and should be granted access rights.

This situation cuts boths ways....!!!!

His story will send shivers down the spine of any man who was asked to donate their sperm by a childless woman in the 90s.

Back then it was impossible for women to use official sperm banks unless they had a male partner – something that is no longer the case.