Home Mail MemberMap Chat (0) Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Lounge > D.C.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-25-2005, 09:11 AM  
mlyonsd mlyonsd is offline
Supporter
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Spink, SD
Casino cash: $53714
Case Could Freeze Sperm Donation

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,157553,00.html

Wednesday, May 25, 2005
By Wendy McElroy

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court (search) is currently considering a legal appeal that could set a wide-reaching precedent for both child support policy and fertility clinics in the United States.
As one report states, "sperm donors who thought they were getting $50 for their genetic material" a standard clinic fee and nothing more may be in for a real shock.

The case involves sperm donor Joel L. McKiernan (search) and his former lover Ivonne V. Ferguson (search). Ten years ago, they entered a verbal contract that a three-judge panel of the Superior Court said was valid "on its face." In exchange for McKiernan donating sperm that led to the birth of twins through in vitro fertilization, Ferguson released him from any obligation toward the offspring.
(IVF involves fertilizing a woman's eggs with sperm in a lab dish and then placing the fertilized eggs back in the aspiring mother's uterus.)

Ferguson denies that an agreement to release McKiernan from responsibility ever existed. Nevertheless, she named her ex-husband as "father" on the birth certificate. Five years after the twins' birth, she filed against McKiernan for child support.

The tangled personal circumstances of this situation constitute a legal nightmare and the sort of "hard" case that makes bad law. And bad law is exactly what may result.

Both the trial court and the Superior Court called Ferguson's actions "despicable" and expressed sympathy toward McKiernan. Yet both found him liable to pay over $1,500 a month in child support plus arrearages to the now-divorced Ferguson. (McKiernan has married, moved, and now has two other children he is raising.)

Why was McKiernan considered liable? The original contract was deemed unenforceable due to "legal, equitable and moral principles." The main abrogating principle: Biological parents cannot waive the interests of a child a third party who has an independent "right" to support from each one of them.

It does not matter that a third party did not exist when the contract was forged and probably would have never existed without the contract. Nor does it matter that the law generally presumes a husband to be the father of any child born during the marriage. The donation of sperm alone makes McKiernan financially liable for the twins until they reach adulthood.

Or it will, if he loses the Supreme Court appeal, which weighs the extent of a sperm donor's liability. Presumably, the ruling would equally impact women who donate eggs for another's fertility treatment.

Pennsylvania, like most states, has not adopted a version of the Uniform Parentage Act, which protects sperm or egg donors from the responsibilities of parenthood. Many if not most donors merely presume that anonymity provides such protection.

In the case of Ferguson v. McKiernan, the identity of the sperm donor was always known. But the principle sustained by the courts could apply with equal force to anonymous donors.

Ferguson's attorney argued that her case did not threaten sperm banks or fertility clinics because such facilities had not been involved. McKiernan's attorney noted that the contract in question was virtually identical to the ones they offer: namely, anonymity or non-involvement in exchange for a donation. If a mother or father cannot waive the "right" of a potential child to support, then it is not clear how a fertility clinic could do so in its capacity as a broker for profit between the two "parents."

The danger this precedent would pose was expressed by Arthur Caplan, a professor and medical ethicist at the University of Pennsylvania. Caplan explained that anyone who donates genetic material on the basis of anonymity "ought to understand that their identity could be made known to any child that's produced and they could be seen by the courts as the best place to go to make sure the child has adequate financial support." The prospect becomes more likely if one parent is requesting support from a government agency.

Sperm banks are legally required to maintain a record of each donor's identity, often indefinitely.

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Judge Ronald D. Castille was more blunt than Caplan in his assessment of the risk that donations would cease. "What man in their right mind would agree to that [sperm donation] if we decide this case in your favor? Nobody." What woman in her right mind would donate eggs?

Estimates on infertility in the United States vary but the rate is often placed at about 15 percent, even without including gay and lesbian couples. That is, 15 percent of couples fail to conceive after one year of regular, unprotected intercourse. If miscarriages are factored in, the rate increases.

According to Dr. Cappy Rothman of the California Cryobank, an estimated 150,000 to 200,000 artificial inseminations occur every year in the U.S. And that is only one form of infertility treatment. Though these procedures are usually performed using the sperm and eggs of the couple hoping to conceive, the use of donated sperm and eggs is a common solution to infertility.

If the Pennsylvania Supreme Court finds the sperm donor to be liable for child support, then many forms of infertility treatment in most states could become less available and more expensive. Those donors who step forward will want to be compensated for their increased legal risk.
The courts have pitted a child's "best interests" against the rights of biological parents to contract with each other on the terms of reproduction. They may have also opened a Pandora's box of complications involving a child's claim on a sperm donor's data and wealth.

But the worst consequence may be the denial of life itself to children who are desperately wanted by infertile couples. The law should not obstruct their chances of conceiving.
Posts: 24,844
mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2005, 09:15 AM   #2
jspchief jspchief is offline
BAMF
 
jspchief's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Your Face
Casino cash: $60024
Ugh. The incompetence of our courts is beyond my comprehension.
__________________
Courage is not the absence of fear but rather the judgment that something is more important than fear.
The brave may not live forever but the cautious do not live at all.
Posts: 23,968
jspchief wants to die in a aids tree fire.jspchief wants to die in a aids tree fire.jspchief wants to die in a aids tree fire.jspchief wants to die in a aids tree fire.jspchief wants to die in a aids tree fire.jspchief wants to die in a aids tree fire.jspchief wants to die in a aids tree fire.jspchief wants to die in a aids tree fire.jspchief wants to die in a aids tree fire.jspchief wants to die in a aids tree fire.jspchief wants to die in a aids tree fire.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2005, 09:19 AM   #3
Amnorix Amnorix is offline
In BB I trust
 
Amnorix's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Boston, Mass.
Casino cash: $212548
Where's the pro family moral majority on this one? Rights of the child govern, etc.? No.

Seriously, I understand the court's logic here, but strenuously disagree with it. Historically, the "best interests of the child" rule has governed EVERYTHING when it comes to rules regarding parents and $$ and other responsibilities.

Here, however, it seems utterly misapplied. The main problem, as usual, is that the rule was designed back in the 1700s and applying it to the modern world makes for some tough (and bad) decisions.
Posts: 32,932
Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2005, 12:16 PM   #4
alanm alanm is offline
Incognito
 
alanm's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Nebraska/Wyoming/Colorado
Casino cash: $63943
Lesbians all over the US will be mourning this.
__________________
It bears repeating, **** Herm, Pioli, Haley, and Crennel for ****ing up my franchise for a goddamn decade.
Buehler 445
Posts: 29,745
alanm Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.alanm Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.alanm Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.alanm Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.alanm Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.alanm Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.alanm Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.alanm Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.alanm Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.alanm Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.alanm Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2005, 12:34 PM   #5
Soupnazi Soupnazi is offline
Totally yummy
 
Soupnazi's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: The kitchen @ River Falls
Casino cash: $12095
I find this interesting given that it came from pennsylvania. There was a somewhat high-profile case a few years ago in which a guy was wanting to get out of his child support payments given that he had found out his then wife had cheated and lied about it. The ruling was that the children were a product of the marriage, and thus, his responsibility. Despite the fact that they were not his children.

Now the prevailing wisdom is that the genetic donor is responsible?
Posts: 1,212
Soupnazi is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutSoupnazi is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutSoupnazi is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutSoupnazi is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutSoupnazi is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutSoupnazi is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutSoupnazi is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutSoupnazi is the dumbass Milkman is always talking about
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2005, 12:42 PM   #6
whoman69 whoman69 is offline
The Master
 
whoman69's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Casino cash: $61445
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soupnazi
I find this interesting given that it came from pennsylvania. There was a somewhat high-profile case a few years ago in which a guy was wanting to get out of his child support payments given that he had found out his then wife had cheated and lied about it. The ruling was that the children were a product of the marriage, and thus, his responsibility. Despite the fact that they were not his children.

Now the prevailing wisdom is that the genetic donor is responsible?
The law is often fashioned by expediency. We need to start judging by what is right.
__________________
-Watching Eddie Podolak
Quote:
Originally posted by Logical
When the boobs are a bouncin, the Chiefs will be trouncin
What the Raiders fan has said is true, our customs are different. What Al Davis has said is unimportant, and we do not hear his words.
Posts: 23,081
whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2005, 12:51 PM   #7
Bwana Bwana is offline
GONE FISHING
 
Bwana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Billings, Montana
Casino cash: $2147483647
Wow, what a load of crap.
Posts: 47,160
Bwana has disabled reputation
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2005, 02:24 PM   #8
Logical Logical is offline
Screw U if U can't take a joke
 
Logical's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Casino cash: $94931
Man I thought Iowanian would be all over this one, given the thread header.

Walking out dissappointed.
Posts: 31,579
Logical is not part of the Right 53.Logical is not part of the Right 53.Logical is not part of the Right 53.Logical is not part of the Right 53.Logical is not part of the Right 53.Logical is not part of the Right 53.Logical is not part of the Right 53.Logical is not part of the Right 53.Logical is not part of the Right 53.Logical is not part of the Right 53.Logical is not part of the Right 53.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.