Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So you disagree with me then turn around and make my point. Alrighty then.
Like I said if this had gone the normal route she wouldn't even know who the father is. The law does not disagree with that. Now he gets to pay.
It wouldn't matter what route it had gone if they had used a doctor, or if one of them had been a doctor.
They did use a doctor. You should actually read the article. For the third time it has nothing to do with why this happened.
But the Kansas Department for Children and Families argues the agreement isn't valid, because instead of working with a doctor, Marotta agreed to drop off containers with his sperm at the couple's home, according to documents faxed to the Shawnee County District Court late Wednesday and provided to the AP.
They did use a doctor. You should actually read the article. For the third time it has nothing to do with why this happened.
Sperm donor ordered to pay child support! | HLNtv.comMarotta responded to a Craigslist ad in 2009 posted by Angela Bauer and Jennifer Schreiner that they were seeking a sperm donor. The parties signed paperwork at the time which absolved Marotta of any financial obligations or parental responsibilities. So that should have been the end of it.
Except for one buried stipulation contained within Kansas statute 23-2208(f), which states that artificial insemination must be performed by a licensed physician. In this instance it was not and the state's position is that this now invalidates the agreement.
"In cases where the parties do not go through a physician or a clinic, there remains the question of who actually is the father of a child or children," a spokeswoman for the Department of Children and Families said earlier this week. "DCF is required by statute to establish paternity and then pursue child support from the noncustodial parent."
So as was stated 26 pages ago. This guy is in trouble because he did something as serious as donate sperm without Consulting attorney who would've advised him of the law and kept this from happening.
So as was stated 26 pages ago. This guy is in trouble because he did something as serious as donate sperm without Consulting attorney who would've advised him of the law and kept this from happening.
So as was stated 26 pages ago. This guy is in trouble because he did something as serious as donate sperm without Consulting attorney who would've advised him of the law and kept this from happening.
Why don't you post a link to the law that DCFS is using to justify this claim? Or are we just supposed to assume it exists, and that it says what the flunky says it says?
So as was stated 26 pages ago. This guy is in trouble because he did something as serious as donate sperm without Consulting attorney who would've advised him of the law and kept this from happening.
No he is in trouble because it was a personal transaction.
So as was stated 26 pages ago. This guy is in trouble because he did something as serious as donate sperm without Consulting attorney who would've advised him of the law and kept this from happening.
Why don't you post a link to the law that DCFS is using to justify this claim? Or are we just supposed to assume it exists, and that it says what the flunky says it says?
Ive already put you in the child not to be taken seriously category. If youd like to move out thats fine just prove that youre capable of adult discussion. Which includes conceding facts even when those facts don't agree with your opinions. until then we have nothing to debate.
I am the only one being adult. And apparently the only one who understands if you don't gotsa name you don't gotsa claim.
Why don't you post a link to the law that DCFS is using to justify this claim? Or are we just supposed to assume it exists, and that it says what the flunky says it says?
Ive already put you in the child not to be taken seriously category. If youd like to move out thats fine just prove that youre capable of adult discussion. Which includes conceding facts even when those facts don't agree with your opinions. until then we have nothing to debate.
Of course you have, I proved you were wrong.
I am the only one being adult. And apparently the only one who understands if you don't gotsa name you don't gotsa claim.
And I must be the only one that understands that when the government starts trying to pressure people into naming names it has a lot more resources than the average lesbain couple in Kansas.
Ive already put you in the child not to be taken seriously category. If youd like to move out thats fine just prove that youre capable of adult discussion. Which includes conceding facts even when those facts don't agree with your opinions. until then we have nothing to debate.
Of course you have, I proved you were wrong.
You didn't prove me wrong. what you proved is that you dismiss facts which get in the way of your opinions.
take this case for example. Only a child would deny that these people simply did not follow the law in a way which would have prevented this from happening. Yet you insist that the state is at fault rather then the people who didn't comply with the law.
Also I have noticed that you fail to concede that the state has an absolute right to try to recoup welfare.
I can only conclude that you are only here to read your own post and congratulate yourself on how smart you think you are rather than actually to discuss anything.
You keep posting this. All it shows is that the women absolved Marotta of financial responsibility. It doesn't say anything about the girlfriend adopting the child.Where is your link stating that the girlfriend adopted the child? Oh, up your ass.No, I am flat out saying that one was the natural mother, and the other adopted the child from the father. I am implying that you are an idiot for not knowing that natural parents do not have to adopt their children.
What the fuck, can't you read the posts you are replying to? Did you forget that I already proved there are adoption papers on file with the court? The very ones you insisted do not exist simply so you can argue that the state has a right to get into people's bedrooms?
Court records show that the sperm donor, 46-year-old William Marotta, signed an agreement in March 2009 giving up parental rights to the then-couple, Angela Bauer and Jennifer Schreiner. The agreement also absolves Marotta of financial responsibility. The state contends the agreement isn't valid.
Read more here: TOPEKA, Kan.: State trying to make sperm donor pay child support | National | The Sun Herald
One of the articles I read stated that the women kept the biological father updated on the status of the daughter via email.Then they should have went to another sperm bank until they found one that said yes...
Look, Im not someone who would turn to Craigslist for sperm, and it seems weird to me too, but that was their choice. Even if they had gone to a sperm bank to purchase the sperm and had it shipped home , the way the law is written, the donor could still be held liable for support.
Then they should go back and write a new law...
I mean, darn, why didn't they just claim that she met this guy in a bar and didn't catch his name! That would have saved him some trouble.
I kind of have to wonder how they had all his information to give him up. And kept it all this time.
Kids are more important than governments, and should definitely be protected from them, which is why I don't understand your insistence that the government has a say in this at all.
Because they went to the government asking them to foot the bill for this kid.
Only because the government just decided that it should be in charge of medical care.
One of the articles I read stated that the women kept the biological father updated on the status of the daughter via email.Look, Im not someone who would turn to Craigslist for sperm, and it seems weird to me too, but that was their choice. Even if they had gone to a sperm bank to purchase the sperm and had it shipped home , the way the law is written, the donor could still be held liable for support.
Then they should go back and write a new law...
I mean, darn, why didn't they just claim that she met this guy in a bar and didn't catch his name! That would have saved him some trouble.
I kind of have to wonder how they had all his information to give him up. And kept it all this time.
Of course you have, I proved you were wrong.
You didn't prove me wrong. what you proved is that you dismiss facts which get in the way of your opinions.
take this case for example. Only a child would deny that these people simply did not follow the law in a way which would have prevented this from happening. Yet you insist that the state is at fault rather then the people who didn't comply with the law.
Also I have noticed that you fail to concede that the state has an absolute right to try to recoup welfare.
I can only conclude that you are only here to read your own post and congratulate yourself on how smart you think you are rather than actually to discuss anything.
I dismiss facts? Aren't you the guy that insisted that the state didn't get a cut of the child support? Aren't you also the guy that insisted that, because you worked with DCFS you knew for a fact that my claim was wrong? How did that work out for you again?
Are you saying that this guy has children acting as his lawyers? Because, I can assure you, they are very insistent that their client did not violate any law, that he signed a valid contract, and that the state does not have the power to force him to pay child support simply because he donated sperm. Do you really want to take the position that only children would make that statement?
Do I want to dent that the state has the right to recoup welfare? Absolutely, governments do not have rights. Now that I have dealt with that nonsense, I am free to point out that the state is not attempting to recoup any welfare payments from the father, they are attempting to force him to provide child support. Since your initial position was that the state doesn't actually get anything out of child support, yet you simultaneously insisted they were only trying to get back the cost of the welfare, I am not sure exactly how to deal with your contradictory position. Can I just mock it because you are trying to argue that white is both white and black at the same time, while simultaneously claiming it is purple?
I am here to read my own posts? Is that why I am so familiar with yours, and can point out how absurd you have been during this entire discussion?
Because they went to the government asking them to foot the bill for this kid.
Only because the government just decided that it should be in charge of medical care.
Thank God for that... I would hate to have my medical care only determined by the calculations of my worth by a corporation...
Oh, wait. that did happen to me, which is why I'm for socialized medicine now. Fuck the corporations.
And any asshole who sells his sperm on Craig's List DESERVES to be soaked.
Only because the government just decided that it should be in charge of medical care.
Thank God for that... I would hate to have my medical care only determined by the calculations of my worth by a corporation...
Oh, wait. that did happen to me, which is why I'm for socialized medicine now. Fuck the corporations.
And any asshole who sells his sperm on Craig's List DESERVES to be soaked.
Good call man. The Government has a great track record for managing things with immense success. Say for example the tax money they take from us. Look at how well they managed that... been to a DMV lately? Been to the Third World lately?
Only because the government just decided that it should be in charge of medical care.
Thank God for that... I would hate to have my medical care only determined by the calculations of my worth by a corporation...
Oh, wait. that did happen to me, which is why I'm for socialized medicine now. Fuck the corporations.
And any asshole who sells his sperm on Craig's List DESERVES to be soaked.
Good call man. The Government has a great track record for managing things with immense success. Say for example the tax money they take from us. Look at how well they managed that... been to a DMV lately? Been to the Third World lately?
Thank God for that... I would hate to have my medical care only determined by the calculations of my worth by a corporation...
Oh, wait. that did happen to me, which is why I'm for socialized medicine now. Fuck the corporations.
And any asshole who sells his sperm on Craig's List DESERVES to be soaked.
Good call man. The Government has a great track record for managing things with immense success. Say for example the tax money they take from us. Look at how well they managed that... been to a DMV lately? Been to the Third World lately?
The government's ineptitude does not absolve a person of the personal responsibility to make sure they have their own ducks in a row.
This donor didn't, so now he's gonna pay the price for his OWN ineptitude. Personal responsibility is anathema to you eh?
