http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,271116,00.html

Sperm donor is required to pay child support to lesbian couple....thoughts?

I have mixed emotions on this one...just wondering what everyone's thoughts are.

I think that is one of the most absurd things I have ever heard in my life!

Well, for anyone that has set up an account and made deposits, it is time to close the account and bank elsewhere

"Part of the decision came down because he was so involved with them," Jacob said Wednesday. "It wasn't that he went to the (sperm) bank and that was it. They called him Papa."

and??? Are you agreeing that it is ok for the court to mandate child support?

Uh-oh... ::looks around nervously::

no, i was trying to highlight some of the context of the actual case before people here see the "foxier" headline and start running with it.

I'm kind of in the middle with this one...he was an active part in the child's life and they called him Papa....but when he donated the sperm, was he signing up to be a father? Or just to help out his friends?

that the point of what i quoted: in many child support cases, a person who is not the legal caregiver of a child is held to be responsible for supporting it because of the support that was provided to that child and the support that became relied upon by that child. it's quasi-contract law.

but i'm just spit-ballin' here. i don't know all the facts.

Post deleted by XODUS

Did Crosby pay child support to Melissa Ethridge? Does anyone know?

why'd you delete that X? you were right on the money.

Did her kids call him "Daddy"?

This is really weird - I can't see how they could enforce child support, unless his former contributions (monetary) were taken into account. Like Ron mentioned - his proir actions implied continuing support.

But still.....it doesn't seem right and sets a scary precident.

ok, after reading it I am laughing. first off the guy is dead, so he can't pay support anyhow he was 63, one of the women was 48 and the other 33. Further, it mentions he didn't go to a sperm bank but that the fertilization was done informally. which means he got to hit it. is the real question about establishing financial responsibility to have the two children have claim to his estate?

after i read the article fully, it became apparent my statement lacked relevance. the man is dead, he is not going to be involved.

not true. he has an estate.

this precedent has already been set, all over the country men are paying child support for children that aren't theirs caused they had scandalous wives. The courts thus far have upheld it is their responsibility to provide support to these children because they are the parent of record regardless of true paternity.

which i mentioned in my other post...

Are you referring to men who "thought" their children were geneticaly their own but then found out their wives were "hitin' it" elsewhere?

Dang Xodus - why do your posts keep going away????

i am smilin',

But what are you smilin' about?

oh, i think you know...

I really don't see that as fair either. It's so hare to see where to draw the line. In your example a man has been led to believe that a child was his and most likely acted a such. I don't think that the child should have to suffer because the mom's been a w****, but I don't think that the non-bio dad should legally have to pay. Morally, maybe, but that should have to be up to him. It seems like so often the woman won't give up the name of the other man (if she knows) because it's just easier to get the money where she can.

This one's different because he knew he was the sperm donor, but they (the women) chose to have the ceremonies and such supposedly making them wife and wife. It seems that Daddy was a term of endearment. But he!! - who knows!!

Stupid women!!! BLAH!!!

hey maybe they used a turkey baster........lmao