State pursuing child support from sperm donor
Associated Press/Topeka Capital-Journal - Sat 12:35 PM 12/29/2012
A Kansas man who signed away his parental rights when he donated sperm to a Topeka couple is now being pursued by the state for child support after the mother received financial help from the state.
An attorney for William Marotta says that the state's effort to have Marotta declared the baby's father runs contrary to a Kansas Supreme Court ruling.
The case is scheduled for a hearing Jan. 8 in Shawnee County District Court.
Marotta answered an ad in 2009 from a lesbian couple seeking a sperm donor. He and the couple, Angela Bauer and Jennifer Schreiner, signed an agreement holding him harmless for support of the daughter Schreiner conceived through artificial insemination.
Schreiner later fell on hard times and applied for state financial assistance.
Comments must stay on topic and be respectful. Comments that are personal attacks, make unfounded accusations, or are for the purpose of "trolling" or inciting others will be removed. Offending users will have their profile suspended.
Post a comment Log in or Register to comment
troy
Saturday 29 December 2012 17:45 Report this comment
You've got to be kidding me! He signed away his rights, which means he has no legal connection to the daughter. This should not be a two way street. Mrs. Schreiner should have no legal connection to the father. Do these lesbians think they have special rights? The law doesn't apply to them? They can agree to something until it does not suit them anymore then get a lawyer and attempt to change the rules?
TheTed
Saturday 29 December 2012 18:12 Report this comment
Have the State Benefits and Financial Assistance programs come to this? .....Ted
callme67410
Sunday 30 December 2012 09:47 Report this comment
Gotta agree with both of the previous comments. An agreement was signed that resolves all responsibility from the donor, and maybe if we weren't supporting so many actual deadbeat dad's children (the ones that knew what they were doing) we could actually help out people in need of assistance.
ibron
Sunday 30 December 2012 16:36 Report this comment
Troy, It's not the lesbo's, it the State coming after him for child support. Which still means that somebody is a complete idiot.
Iamgonnagetyou
Sunday 30 December 2012 17:28 Report this comment
Its crap like this that wastes millions of taxpayer dollars. If the state needs to go after someone it needs to be the lesbo's mate. This shows us another problem that arise with gays. Maybe other gays need to take care of their own. When it comes down to it gays always want straight people to bail them out when they have problems.
troy
Sunday 30 December 2012 21:06 Report this comment
This has nothing to do with homosexuals taking care of each other. Don't see homosexuals asking heterosexuals to bail them out and lesbians have no choice but to seek the help of a male in order to have children. This is about the law. A legal document was drawn up and signed, end of story. Where is Mrs. Bauer? Why isn't the state going after her like any other deadbeat father? Make her pay.
Fredd
Monday 31 December 2012 07:34 Report this comment
Bauer was neither the mother, father, nor married partner to Schreiner. In Kansas, she has no parental responsibility or rights. As to the agreement, that was an agreement between Shreiner, Bauer and Marotta. The People of Kansas didn't sign the agreement. When the People of Kansas were asked to pay, they were under no obligation to follow the agreement.
Mookie
Monday 31 December 2012 10:10 Report this comment
I strongly agree with Kansas State forcing bio-father to pay the child support since the lesbos preferred free charge than than paying the medical expense. -The state forced the women to reveal Mr Marotta's identity and declared the contract relinquishing him of financial responsibility void because the insemination was not performed by a certified doctor.- Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2255241/Sperm-donor-ordered-pay-child-support-lesbian-couple-despite-giving-rights-child.html#ixzz2Ge7ygGxo
Fredd
Monday 31 December 2012 10:51 Report this comment
Here is the Kansas law KSA 38-1114(f): "The donor of semen provided to a licensed physician for use in artificial insemination of a woman other than the donor's wife is treated in law as if he were not the birth father of a child thereby conceived, unless agreed to in writing by the donor and the woman." In other words, by not using a licensed physician he left himself open to the paternity. Had they used a physician, they would have had to sign a contract TO give him paternal rights. As it is, he is the father under Kansas law.
Fredd
Monday 31 December 2012 10:58 Report this comment
As this practice is more and more common, parents may want to teach their sons the lessons of this case. Unless you do it through a physician, artificial insemination makes you just as responsible for that child as doing it the old fashioned way :)
troy
Monday 31 December 2012 21:08 Report this comment
So a doctor performed the artificial insemination or was it performed the old fashioned way? Doesn't matter. The father shouldn't be held responsible. The two lesbians got themselves into this situation, they should find a way out. The state needs to stay out also.
Fredd
Monday 31 December 2012 21:46 Report this comment
Troy, I'd go along with your post except for one thing -- That is not the way the law is written. And the law wasn't written that way for good reason. If a doctor is not involved, then every guy that gets his girlfriend pregnant will pressure her to sign one of these contracts. That way he would be absolved from supporting the child and the taxpayers would have to pick up the tab. That's hardly fair. The State does not need to stay out of it. The State very often is the only advocate the child has. If the State decides the best thing for the child is for the biological father to pay, then we should do what is best for the child. Mr. Marotta should have talked to a family law lawyer before he put himself and his family in this position.
Iamgonnagetyou
Tuesday 1 January 2013 08:45 Report this comment
So fredd you are saying tshe gays walk and the donor gets hung? Now if he did not commit the dirty with this gay who did the procedure to inseminate her somebody that spent a night at the Holiday Inn? Seems there will be alot more to this story to come to light.
Fredd
Tuesday 1 January 2013 11:06 Report this comment
Iamgonnagetyou, I'm saying that is the way the law is written. Because they wanted to save the $250.00 it costs to use a doctor for this, he is now the biological and legal father of that child. The state has a process to allow an sperm donor protections; Mr Marotta did not follow that process. Now he is as liable as any other father. He probably would have been smart to talk to a lawyer before he got himself and his family into this mess. He could even have looked the law up online. The law is written in simple English.