[lostalex]

Genetics has absolutely NOTHING to do with being a parent. The idea that just because you are genetically related to someone you have some responsibility towards them is ridiculous.

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by anniek76

I don't think he thought this was going to happen - he thought he was doing a good deed for a friend and had their word that he would assume no responsibility I'd call it a bloody selfless and generous thing...unfortunately he did not have your cynical views obviously.... He is foolish for not getting some legal advice prior...

Anyone who has had problems conceiving or issues such as this would / should have been eternally grateful for someone who had given them the greatest gift - not thrown it back in his face years down the line....

The woman has given his name to the CSA so ultimately it is down to her....

csa will have said give us the name or you will lose your benefits.

[lostalex]

If genetics matters so much, then why arn't we holding all descendants of NAZI's accountable for the Holocaust? Why arn't we holding all of the British and Dutch and Portugese descendants of the Transatlantic slave trade accountable for slavery?

[Z]

Even if CSA threatened to not give her benefits, she still double crossed the guy by giving his details. It's a simple fact if you don't give a name, nobody's going to make you. We don't live in a state with a Stasi or a KGB to chase up these things, for God's sake! I'm on the guy's side here; he probably didn't think he'd ever need any kind of formal arrangement because he heard nothing for 13 years. What a bitch to do this to her friend!

[lostalex]

He did a good deed for an obviously ungrateful, unstable, and selfish pathetic welfare queen. her kids should be taken into state custody immediately, and this guy is irrelevant. This woman can't take care of her kids. I'm SOOO f-ing sick of people that can't take care of their kids, and then laying everyone else with the burden of their f-ing brood.

Not only should her kids be taken away, but she should be spayed like a stray dog.

[AnnieK]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

csa will have said give us the name or you will lose your benefits.

But if she had stuck to original story that they had discussed that it was a fling with an American or even a one night stand who she didn't know they wouldn't be able to take her benefits and it wouldn't have been this betrayal. Its just wrong.

[Vicky.]

The fathers name is not required to claim normal child benefits. The only reason the fathers name is required is if you want child support payments from HIM. I know this as a girl I know has 'unknown' on her childs birth certificate and she still gets child benefit/child tax credits.

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by Zee

Even if CSA threatened to not give her benefits, she still double crossed the guy by giving his details. It's a simple fact if you don't give a name, nobody's going to make you. We don't live in a state with a Stasi or a KGB to chase up these things, for God's sake! I'm on the guy's side here; he probably didn't think he'd ever need any kind of formal arrangement because he heard nothing for 13 years. What a bitch to do this to her friend!

so if a friend ask's you for your sperm and says dont worry,do you give it to her.

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by anniek76

But if she had stuck to original story that they had discussed that it was a fling with an American or even a one night stand who she didn't know they wouldn't be able to take her benefits and it wouldn't have been this betrayal. Its just wrong.

maybe she did not think about her answer when questioned.

[AnnieK]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

so if a friend ask's you for your sperm and says dont worry,do you give it to her.

obviously he did...naive yes but they had some form of verbal agreement which she initially honoured as she has not asked him for any money for 13 years...

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by anniek76

obviously he did...naive yes but they had some form of verbal agreement which she initially honoured as she has not asked him for any money for 13 years...

thats true so why are we on a witch hunt if she has supported them for 13 years!

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

thats true so why are we on a witch hunt if she has supported them for 13 years!

They are HER kids. Hers and her ex partners. If anyone should be made to pay, it should be the ex partner IMO.

That wont happen though as the law was different back when the children were born.

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

They are HER kids. Hers and her ex partners. If anyone should be made to pay, it should be the ex partner IMO.

That wont happen though as the law was different back when the children were born.

thats true, in the eyes of the law he will be made to pay.

[thesheriff443]

the road to hell is paved with good intentions!

[AnnieK]

Its such a shame when there are genuine absentee fathers who get away with paying child support because they evade the CSA in one way or another- this guy has done a good thing and will be hounded for it when the CSA should really be chasing people who have walked out on their children and do not pay for their responsibilities

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by anniek76

Its such a shame when there are genuine absentee fathers who get away with paying child support because they evade the CSA in one way or another- this guy has done a good thing and will be hounded for it when the CSA should really be chasing people who have walked out on their children and do not pay for their responsibilities

I agree with this 100%

[GypsyGoth]

Wow, it's such a pity, she'll make it more difficult for other couples to find donors.

[Nedusa]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

the law in this case says its his responsibility.

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....!!!!

[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.

[Ammi]

..it sounds as though after 13 years, someone's had a word with her and said she should try to claim on this..it doesn't make sense that she would suddenly think to do this after all of that time....

..if it goes to court it'll surely be a landmark case...and I hope she's put in her place...it's a horrible thing to do..and does she even consider how the child feels in all of this..or is it all about the money..

[Nedusa]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Well in that case he should have known that was the situation and if didn't know then he should have enquired. Knowing then that these women could not obtain sperm from a proper sperm bank without a male partner (Clue..??) then he should have only agreed subject to strict legal contracts absolving him of ALL responsibility to these future children.

By entering into this arrangement on such a casual basis he has put himself in a very vulnerable legal position and is somewhat at the mercy of the mother(s) of these children.

Whilst we may argue the toss in this thread about who is more at fault, spare a thought for the poor kids in question. With two lesbian mothers and an absent father who wants absolutely nothing to do with them playground time must be a barrel of laughs fighting off all the taunting and bullying. The children here are the real losers in this sordid mess...!!!

[bbfan1991]

Poor guy, so he has done a thing to help two people he cared about now it has come back to haunt him. Some people are so ungrateful!