Kansas wants sperm donor to pay child support - WTF???

[tttppp]

government interfering with private contracts?? cannot say I am surprised?? isn't that one of their main functions?

This is basic contract law. The government is suppose to enforce contracts, not break them and create their own.

 

[klamath]

The guy tried to mess around with an already tricky legal area and he got burned. Why the F**K would he answer some stupid ad to create a child for an unknown couple. Just maybe the idiot should have spent a little time researching the laws of the state of KS on what the hell the requirements were for absolving yourself of legal responsibity for the child he was voluntarily conceiving.
Oh, wow I signed a contract relieving myself of legal responsiblity when I gave my little girl to a child rapist......But, but, but he said he wouldn't hold me responsible...

 

[devil21]

The guy tried to mess around with an already tricky legal area and he got burned. Why the F**K would he answer some stupid ad to create a child for an unknown couple. Just maybe the idiot should have spent a little time researching the laws of the state of KS on what the hell the requirements were for absolving yourself of legal responsibity for the child he was voluntarily conceiving.
Oh, wow I signed a contract relieving myself of legal responsiblity when I gave my little girl to a child rapist......But, but, but he said he wouldn't hold me responsible...

Are you comparing sperm donations to felony criminal conduct?

 

[acptulsa]

Are you comparing sperm donations to felony criminal conduct?

Shall we add up the monetary cost in this instance? The state of Kansas seems to be.

 

[klamath]

Are you comparing sperm donations to felony criminal conduct?

I am talking about knowingly donating sperm for the know purpose of creating your child to an unknown couple of unknown moral charactor.

 

[klamath]

The government enforces contracts signed by individuals and adjudicates in government courts any disagreements between the parties. The state of Kansas determines what the legal frame work those contracts are in. Because two parties sign a contract between themselves giving up the rights of a noninvolved third party it is not a legal binding contract on that third party.

 

[presence]

Ok... I'm still on that subject of "do you folks not believe in adoption?"

 

[klamath]

Ok... I'm still on that subject of "do you folks not believe in adoption?"

I believe in adoption when set rules for adoption are followed. I don't believe somebody has the right to walk up to a stranger on the street and sign a contract to give their child away to the said stranger.

 

[idiom]

Ok... I'm still on that subject of "do you folks not believe in adoption?"

You can't adopt sperm. Don't be ridiculous. Imagine how many forms you would have to sign for a few millilitres...

 

[mad cow]

There are laws in some States(safe haven laws)where a Mother can leave her baby at a hospital or fire station rather than in a dumpster without identifying herself and certainly without a contract or following any rules for adoption.

I assume,but don't know,that she would not be liable for child support if she was identified as the mother through fingerprints,DNA,camera or such.
I also assume and hope that she would have no claim against the adoptive parents if she changed her mind years later and wanted the child back.

 

[dannno]

So, for a husband and wife who have trouble conceiving and elect to IVF, you're saying since the child isn't conceived naturally, he bears no responsibility for the child she bears?

There are married couples in which the husband "doesn't get any pussy out of" conceiving a child.

But think about it, if a husband and wife are having trouble conceiving, the dude is probably getting it a lot. If he elects to IVF and wants to support the child then he's certainly morally responsible. I just think it is BS that the state is MAKING this guy responsible when he was just being nice and making a donation to the couple (even if he received some $$) and so it's not like a deadbeat dad who went out and had unprotected sex.

And then there are men who get way too much of it, and makes me really question and look down upon my sex... and facepalm.

No such thing. Plenty of guys not getting nearly enough, though.

 

[torchbearer]

He has a point. But that doesn't mean it's universal.

A man has some sperm stolen by a speed freak who runs off with an abuser. He finds out and goes for custody of his child, to get that child out of the abusive situation. Is he more of a father, despite the fact that he hasn't had a chance to be a father at all?

That's the joy of laws. They're all 'one size fits all', and they don't. Which is why some of us are here arguing that the less government does, the better society can deal with individual situations.

yes, i know. being sarcastic.
some people debating the opposite point have mod powers they will use in disagreements.
i was looking out for the posters account.

 

[torchbearer]

There are laws in some States(safe haven laws)where a Mother can leave her baby at a hospital or fire station rather in a dumpster without identifying herself and certainly without a contract or following any rules for adoption.

I assume,but don't know,that she would not be liable for child support if she was identified as the mother through fingerprints,DNA,camera or such.
I also assume and hope that she would have no claim against the adoptive parents if she changed her mind years later and wanted the child back.

we aren't talking about protecting women, we are talking about punishing men, especially if they go out of their way to help a couple have a baby they want.

 

[presence]

Did this guy actually syringe the mom or did she do it to herself in private?

 

[tangent4ronpaul]

-t

 

[fr33]

Adoption involves a lot more than just individuals signing a contract. The adoption process is designed to take into account the best interests of the child and not just the desires of the adults involved.

The only difference between this case and a regular adoption is the sanction the state puts on a regular adoption. It's in everyone's best interest that the child grow up in a happy home so of course the adoption agency should take that into account. I have NO faith that the state takes that into account.

You can't legally abandon your child just because you made a contract with somebody.

You can legally abandon them at the fire station door. No contract required.

The law does treat sperm donors differently. The State of Kansas doesn't want let this guy off the hook without any documentation from a doctor or sperm bank that he truly is just a sperm donor. I think they're afraid this will set a precedent and biological fathers that have been identified using DNA will claim they were sperm donors to get out of paying child support.

And those are arbitrary laws set by a violent gang, known as the state, who have a monopoly over the business of licensing. I don't attribute any value to their license other than the value I am violently forced to recognize.

 

[Pisces]

The only difference between this case and a regular adoption is the sanction the state puts on a regular adoption. It's in everyone's best interest that the child grow up in a happy home so of course the adoption agency should take that into account. I have NO faith that the state takes that into account.

You can't assume that all parties will always want what is best for the child. The state does not have a monopoly on evil.

You can legally abandon them at the fire station door. No contract required.

Only if your state has a "safe haven" law. (Not all states have these laws.) Even then, the fire station door has to be designated as a safe haven by the state and the child must be under a certain age. It's not at all a blanket right to abandon your child. These laws only apply to narrow circumstances because they are meant to give unstable mothers an alternative to infanticide.

And those are arbitrary laws set by a violent gang, known as the state, who have a monopoly over the business of licensing. I don't attribute any value to their license other than the value I am violently forced to recognize.

The principle that parents are responsible for the children they bring into the world probably pre-dates the state and is not really arbitrary. The laws that are passed to ensure that parents support their children aren't really arbitrary either since they have a purpose that most would agree with. I'm not really talking here about licensing of sperm banks. The law that I'm referring to is the one that requires a sperm donor to have documentation from a doctor or sperm bank to show that they are truly a sperm donor.

 

[otherone]

Mundanes can't create contracts on their own! Remember, corporations are not people, except when it helps to be people. Otherwise corporations are agents of the State.

Of course they can! Apparently (pun intended), you enter a paperless contract whenever you get laid!

 

[Barrex]

WHAT THE FUCK?

WTF!

Lesbians apparently....

LOL at state that gives "child subsidies";
LOL at lesbians that "made" a child that they can not support;
LOL donor for getting lucky with 2 lesbians and then getting caught;
LOL at taxpayers that have pay for this kind of stupidity;
LOL at this thread...

Signature: Kinky stone age conservative christian, doesnt endorse same sex marriages, against abortions, not childs fault.



P.s.

I am sorry but I have to add this: This thread reminded me of "2 hookers braveheart" scene (FREEEEEEEEEEDOOOOOOOMMM)

 

[devil21]

He didn't even accept the $50 they offered.