No Good Deed Goes Unpunished

BarristerSo, you’re just a regular guy doing your thing and you happen to come across a Craigslist ad where a lesbian couple want to have a baby and need a sperm donor. Because you’re such a good guy, you figure, what the heck, why not help them out?

They offer to pay you $50.00 but you say “hey, I’m not doing this for the money, keep your $50.00”. Of course, you sign an agreement waiving all your paternal rights so you can’t be on the hook down the road. Your good deed results in a bouncing baby girl.

Fast forward to today, the little girl is three-years old, and the couple have split up. An application is made for health insurance for the child and the Kansas Department for Child and Families won’t approve the application until the name of the sperm donor is provided.

Now our good guy is faced with a lawsuit brought by the government agency for child support of $6000.00 to cover past payments and a claim for ongoing support.

How can that be, you say? Doesn’t the agreement he signed protect him? Not according to the Kansas authorities. Kansas does not recognize same-sex couples as parents unless conception is through a licensed physician or clinic. They say they are obliged by the law to pursue the father for support payments.

No good deed goes unpunished.

Lawdiva aka Georgialee Lang

3 thoughts on “No Good Deed Goes Unpunished

  1. Well Georgialee, admittedly I’m getting older and hence, a bit more grumpy, but it appears that we are very close to the point where the inmates are going to assume control of the asylum…

  2. In Kansas, apparently there are limits to what parental figures can do to sign away the basic human rights of children. That is, the right of a child to be financially supported by parents and those responsible for them coming into this world. Also in Kansas, there are also the limits of the general taxpayer being forced to pick up the slack from adults who do not fulfill their duty towards children. For example, the current Swiss model requires parents, family and relatives to pick up financially, in order of priority, before the general taxpayer becomes responsible for social assistance. This article also raises the problem of the kind of thinking of a father who knows he has a child, but apparently not caring at all about the child; there is something wrong there. Moreover, is it not the case that in BC, that our law says that several so called fathers can all at the same time become financially responsible for the same child, even when the natural father does not support the child, and when all these other fellows never married the child’s mother or adopted the child.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s