542
543

Men's RightsDoctor sues gay friend for child support, 16 years after he first donated sperm to her. (self.TheRedPill)

submitted by jason2k

I thought you guys at TRP would wanna see this.

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/lifestyle/familyandrelationships/doctor-sues-gay-friend-for-child-support-16-years-after-he-first-donated-sperm-to-her/ar-AAjuD4c?li=AAggNb9&ocid=iehp

She's trying to get child support from a gay friend who helped her out by donating his sperms.

She's a doctor making 250k a year, and yet she's claiming that she can't afford taking care of her teenagers anymore.

She signed an agreement in 2002 stating that she will not seek financial support from him, but he gave her $22,000 in 2011 to help out anyway.

Edited the wording a bit.


[–]syf3r 58 points59 points  (4 children)

Funny I was reading about Speed 2 actor Jason Patric last night. His case was somewhat the opposite. He and his then partner had IVF and conceived a son. When they separated he fought for many years to be recognized as the father. But his ex partner and the state argue that he's just a sperm donor since they didn't marry.

[–]HonestLebo 15 points16 points  (2 children)

"In the best interest of the vagina."?

[–]meninistMD 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I am starting to think reverse psychology work with woman, tell her you don't want the child, she will sue you for child support and to share custody, say you want the child, and she will try to shell him anyway.

[–]HonestLebo 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I don't think there is ever a case where the woman will not sue for child support.

[–]LordThunderbolt 254 points255 points  (36 children)

You know what they say "Give a woman an inch, she'll take a mile...". What a fucking skank that one. She even went as far as rewriting reality, saying that he's acted like their dad all along therefore he's obligated to help. Even though they had formally agreed to no financial support from the donor. The bitch makes $15k a month and can't afford $800 of Child Care?

I'd love to see what this bitch looks like.

[–]inspiron3000 38 points39 points  (7 children)

Why doesn't anyone read the fucking article?

She's not rewriting reality, this is Canadian reality.

There's no such thing as anonymous sperm donorship in Canada.

[–][deleted]  (4 children)

[deleted]

    [–]HonestLebo 4 points5 points  (2 children)

    They linked the article. Do they have to copy paste the whole thing? The onus is on us to follow the damn link and read it too before replying.

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

    [deleted]

      [–]HonestLebo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      I'm sure sometimes you're right.

      [–]chances_are_ur_a_fag 49 points50 points  (19 children)

      well I think he did fuck himself there by acting like a dad. should've let all that shit alone. the way she sees it is that if they both gonna act like parents then both need to contribute equally. he's dumb enough to have contributed in the first place. the written agreements rarely work out.

      [–]TheHumanite 16 points17 points  (7 children)

      In the US, a written agreement like that would be laughed out of court.

      [–]Kumrag 10 points11 points  (6 children)

      deleted What is this?

      [–]Hazelismylife 19 points20 points  (1 child)

      Just the way it is, you can't make any legal agreements ahead of time in regard to child support.

      [–]Endorsed ContributorObio1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Yeah this case isn't as cut and dry as the OP makes it sound. The law is the law.

      Canadian law has always been very clear on this issue -- and they both knew (or should have known) that going in to the situation.

      The only thing being violated here is the former understanding that they had -- which wasn't legally defensible. His mistake was not getting better legal advice when he became a donor.

      [–][deleted] 19 points20 points  (2 children)

      The US government does not care about upholding private contracts. It does not let people work for less than $7.25/hr if they want to. Until very recently it didn't allow gay couples to enter a marriage contract and it still does not allow people to draw up their own marriage contracts that compete with the government's predefined one-size-fits-all contract.

      Since men are on hook for child support even if they want nothing to do with the kid or mother, there is no way that any such contract would be upheld in court because it contradicts child support laws. Add that to the fact that he was acting like a dad and it's game over for this guy.

      Government doesn't care about enforcing contracts between individuals, because it hates your freedom. It only enforces contracts that voters want it to enforce, because the democratic majority hates your freedom.

      [–]LOST_TALE 2 points3 points  (1 child)

      That makes sense. Ancapistan!

      [–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

      Anarcho capitalism is the only political ideology that is logically consistent

      [–]TheHumanite 5 points6 points  (0 children)

      Child support is supposed to be payments for the care of the child. Almost like it's the child's money in the care of the parent. The idea is that you can't agree to anything regarding someone else's money.

      That's why I would never in a million years donate sperm.

      [–]LordThunderbolt 26 points27 points  (7 children)

      It's not like the bitch is on food stamps. She's reeling in $250K a year. He's only making $30K more. That just a nutty bitch who went off the rails.

      [–]alpha_n3rd 4 points5 points  (5 children)

      do we blame the rules or the players?

      [–]pfffft_comeon 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      she ain't doing this to survive. she's out here acting like a loser so i'll blame both this time.

      [–]goldnhorde 0 points1 point  (1 child)

      I'm not even sure.

      you want to say this is proof you don't play the game.

      But the chick is selfish and had TWO kids. I don't begrudge anyone their happiness, but TWO kids right away to a single mom who works in medicine. that is a selfish, selfish woman.

      But this guy .... by the description ... not the reality that it may or may not be ... but by the articles description, he is acting in every way as a separated father.

      In a fair world you would say "hey lady ... you wanted two kids, you got two kids, you make a lot of money .... good bye, no support for you .... hey guy ... come here. I just told her no support for her. but she says she can't "afford" things. and she has paid for a bunch of traveling and expenses based on YOU being with the kids .... so ... I'm telling her no support, but I am telling her that anytime she gets a call from you wanting to take come trip with the kids ... that she needed to tell you it is on your dime."

      [–]alpha_n3rd 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      I compare it to Trump's tax avoidance. Brilliant or deplorable? Depends on your perspective.

      [–]trpthrowaway1852 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      That cunt probably looked at how awesome the man's life is without children, and decided, out of spite, to sue for $$. She doesn't think she's in the wrong even with the contract, This is definitely "feelz over realz."

      [–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

      The problem arises when "both contribute equally" becomes "you give me money."

      [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

      Being a nice guy really pays off doesn't it? Dumb bastard.

      [–]docbloodmoney -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

      lol at believing that a sodomite acted like a father in any way

      [–]unproductoamericano 12 points13 points  (3 children)

      You can search for her name and see some headshots. It's about what you would expect, I suppose.

      [–]tuxedoburrito 13 points14 points  (2 children)

      [–]Domida 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      I'd punch her so hard I'd knock that nose back in place

      [–]n0oo7 62 points63 points  (10 children)

      She makes $250k a year, he makes just shy of $270k a year, and she still wants to nickle and dime him.

      [–]inspiron3000 38 points39 points  (4 children)

      Nobody has read the article.

      “They clearly view him as their ‘dad,’” the application states, adding the teens exchange emails with him, he signs them “dad” and as recently as 2015 they spent a week with him and his partner in Italy.

      His parents acted as grandparents; the teens met Ranson’s extended family on holidays. Ranson paid for trips for the boys to visit him in Europe, or to take them to Disneyland. In 2011, he gave Cullimore $22,000 to help out with costs, a chunk of which is now in Registered Education Savings Plans to pay for the teens’ pending post-secondary education.

      Since he is not an anonymous sperm donor, has a relationship with the children and makes a lot of money, the mother believes that he should pay for 4 years of support to help the boys with their college fund.

      Furthermore, you can't be an anonymous sperm donor in Canada. You can only postpone the identity being known to the offspring until they are 18.

      [–]Entrefut 7 points8 points  (1 child)

      Crazy idea, why doesn't she find a husband to actually father her children? Oh wait, that's why she's in this situation in the first place, she's incapable. I wish courts would ask questions like this. The guy probably wouldn't be spending time with the kids nearly as much if she was capable of bringing a role model into their lives.

      [–]GuitarHero07 9 points10 points  (4 children)

      It said she makes $250k and he makes "just under $cdn 280k." It wasn't really clear. Was it quoting her income in USD and his in Canadian? Either way, $250k US or Canadian is plenty to support 2 kids. The vast majority of families in the US and Canada get by on less.

      [–]Magnum256[🍰] 18 points19 points  (1 child)

      Man there are 4-person families where only one parent is working and they live, successfully, off like $60-70k/year. If a doctor making $250k/year can't afford to take care of her children there's something seriously wrong.

      [–]WiFiPunk 12 points13 points  (0 children)

      Heck my parents had a combined income of 40k for the last 10+ years while supporting 2 kids, and I grew up thinking we were pretty well off.

      [–]dejour 7 points8 points  (1 child)

      I've read some other sources on this. I'm pretty sure they are both Canadian dollar figures. The thing is that she lives in Ontario so she is actually paid in Canadian dollars. He doesn't, so his salary was converted to Canadian dollars for comparison.

      [–]GuitarHero07 5 points6 points  (0 children)

      That makes sense. $250k Canadian works out to ~$190k US in today's exchange rate. That is plenty of money to raise two kids. The majority of US and Canadian families get by on far less.

      [–][deleted] 41 points42 points  (4 children)

      Not shocked.

      Having a kid is a risk so men should not have kids until they are 100% wanting to be a dad. Otherwise that child will just be used against you by a female.

      Also. Bonus points if you use a surrogate and get full custody of a kid. You only need a womb. Not sure why you'd bother with the rest of a woman.

      [–]Elesh 9 points10 points  (2 children)

      Single parents (of any gender) lead to statistically significant negative life outcomes.

      [–]scithion 3 points4 points  (1 child)

      Very true, but then, single parents tend to be shitty or poor people (I say this having been raised by one who was both), creating a lot of selection bias in those statistics. The kids of a decently successful man might fare better than the statistics dominated by shitty and poor people imply.

      [–]Elesh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Your point seems plausible. A single mom chose to be a single mom; men propose, women dispose. Which is why female responsibility is required for positive change in child developmental outcomes. It's not hard to pick a winner, but somehow hypergamy fucks it up.

      This is inductively shown by Stephan Molyneux. The expert on single moms, lol.

      So yah, the selection bias is probably skewed towards shitty people. I just can't see myself putting that as my plan A for a family. I'm 26 and I'll play the field until I'm 35+ if necessary.

      I'm 100% set on kids though. You pay life forward if you enjoy it. I want to be an amazing parent, compared to the dysfunction I grew up with. I'm stubborn as fuck, which made me a nice guy until I got the red pill.

      [–]Limekill 9 points10 points  (0 children)

      I actually remember writing that this could happen in a previous thread on TRP and I was downvoted and told that I was wrong and that it would not happen.

      Well I guess it has happened.

      Really the Government can change the laws on a whim (do you think in these times of Government deficits that they wouldn't try and get donors to pay at least some $$$?), and tomorrow they could say that donors must support children and guess how long before those donors would be paying for child support? Pretty quick.

      [–][deleted] 28 points29 points  (13 children)

      If I was in this situation, given I don't know anything about him besides income, I would counter sue for custody. She wants a fight then Damn bring it on. I[he] have acted as a father their whole life, and despite similar income, she says she cannot afford to support them. All financial bullshit aside, you would probably win that case. Fuck that bitch, leave her with monthly visitation rights. /rant good luck to that dude, hope he doesn't get nailed.

      [–][deleted] 16 points17 points  (3 children)

      Ugh, what? You'd raise that bitches' spoiled teens and that would somehow "teach her"?

      In the end she'd win MORE, by having all the freedom in the world to go round the carousel more, since she won't have to deal with kids consuming any hint of free time.

      [–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (2 children)

      Well they are already act like he's the father, and treat him like he his to a degree, so obviously the dude loves the kids, and all women love their kids, it would hurt her.

      [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

      Dude. Women can't be "hurt". Their hamster will find a way to spin it in their head and they'll feel OKAY with it.

      [–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

      Take a woman's child[ren] and you'll see pain like you've never seen before. TRP aside these are human beings with feelings.

      [–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (1 child)

      Question is if he even wants custody

      [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Yeah I kind of assumed that a mother lives their kids, even if she uses them as tools.

      [–]GuitarHero07 0 points1 point  (2 children)

      Good luck winning the custody battle. The bitch's lawyer would argue that she put in way more work raising the kids and that he has been an absentee father. More likely, fighting for custody would result in him being forced to pay child support and getting limited visitation rights. The man is fucked. It looks like Canada doesn't have the same sperm donor protections that the US has.

      [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Yeah I really have to agree, It just sucks, I wish this wasn't the case.

      [–]inspiron3000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      The children's rights to know their parents has been regarded as more important than donor's rights to anonymity.

      [–]ijperez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Treat the kids as property, that'll teach her! ...and scar a bunch of delicate teenage minds.

      [–]inspiron3000 0 points1 point  (2 children)

      He might be able to sue for visitation. Others donors have done this.
      However, he chose to be a named donor and they let the children decide what contact they wanted to have with him.
      Visitation doesn't seem to be a problem.

      Custody is more complex when the father lives in Italy.

      The Canadian laws may be clear on rights for everyone involved but it is case law that determines the interpretation of law, in Canada (like in UK and US).
      The Ontario Supreme Court has given sperm donors custody rights before, despite pre-conception agreements between women and donors. http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/fertility-dispute-triggers-ripples-of-concern-across-canada-after-sperm-donor-wins-paternity-ruling

      The guy left it open to the boys to learn that he was their father.
      He accepted them into his life and now he can be a parent without responsibilities.

      Financial matters:
      Two well paid doctors have two children.
      One doctor pays the childrens university undergraduate fees until they are 22, the other doesn't.
      For the paying parent, a undergraduate degree in STEM will set them back by 14K + living expenses, say 30K CAN per person, per year.

      That may be a strain on a single income parent, even with a relatively high income. We don't know the tax situation.

      He wants to have a relationship with his boys and call himself 'dad' but he doesn't want to support them financially.

      [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

      It sounds like he's already helped out financially. And as far as university if shes making 250k year and didnt budget as a single parent to put them though college (mind you she makes combination of my mother and her 4 siblings salaries) then she is not a very good parent. People in the US are in serious debt and that's because of low income and high college prices. She wanted kids, she makes a shitload of money annually. I mean really, for three people, that is plenty of money for food, cars, house bills, college bills, vacations, xmas and birthday gifts, with spending cash for eating out everyday. In fours years before taxes, she has made 1 million dollars. I don't know canadian law but I'm sure there is a tax break for being a single parent, so other then property taxes there is no reason she needs more money.

      [–]inspiron3000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      We don't know the specifics of their financial situation but I agree that it can be possible for a high income earner to support two children through college.

      He makes more than her in his World Bank job and it could be questioned what he needs 250+K per year for (besides a new Ferrari) when he doesn't have children to support.

      The law is being tested on principle, not on ability to pay.
      When children desire contact with their named donors and a bond is created between donor and offspring, should the donor support them beyond emotional support?

      I'd speculate that the woman is not happy with her boys detaching from her and attaching to him, which is perfectly normal and should be expected.

      [–][deleted]  (1 child)

      [deleted]

      [–]ijperez 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Don't confuse the brainwashing with professionalism, you can think whatever you want but your words should be sensible. I also felt myself slowly brainwashed into PC culture but I rationalize that it's part of being an altruistic doc.

      [–]Sizzle_Biscuit 6 points7 points  (0 children)

      What a fucking vile person she is.

      [–][deleted]  (1 child)

      [deleted]

      [–]AngrySmaug 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      She actually has some good patient reviews if you skip the ones related to this.

      [–]Magnum256[🍰] 9 points10 points  (5 children)

      I googled her name from the article, Dr. Amie Cullimore, the first page that came up was a yellowpages/phone directory listing and a comment from July this year saying she's a horrible doctor.

      By Krzysztof T

      July 12, 2016

      This doctor will lose your charts and not try to fix her mistakes. I'm in great pain and this doctor simply just doesn't care. We have a sad health care system with doctors like these. Shame.

      http://www.yellowpages.ca/bus/Ontario/Hamilton/Dr-Cullimore-Amie/7310594.html

      People really going after her on ratemds.com as well, dozens of comments from today lol.

      [–]jason2k[S] 10 points11 points  (4 children)

      [–][deleted] 8 points8 points

      [permanently deleted]

      [–]lnTheRearWithTheGear 0 points1 point  (1 child)

      Wow, the message below that pic is incredibly childish... since when did TRP start using these tactics?

      [–]Hilarious_Haplogroup 9 points10 points  (5 children)

      You can't sign a document that abridges the financial rights of children and expect it to be upheld in court. That being said, the judge should throw this case out or rule against the mother...people raise kids on $50k per year or more all the time in the U.S.

      [–]Zebleblic 0 points1 point  (4 children)

      Cost of living in Canada is quite a bit more expensive than the USA, but you could maybe scrape by in Toronto on 50k?

      [–]Hilarious_Haplogroup 1 point2 points  (3 children)

      Toronto or NYC on 50K would be poverty level, to be sure...Winnepeg or Wyoming would obviously be at the other end of the spectrum. I'm thinking the doctor making $250K a year should be able to go on with her life without any help from the guy who gave her a sperm donation 16 years go.

      [–]Zebleblic 1 point2 points  (2 children)

      Winnipeg is still a large Canadian city and would be expensive.

      [–]Hilarious_Haplogroup 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Ah crap, I meant to say Manitoba...I have to look at a map of Canada to know where anything is up there in the Great White North. :-P

      [–]yomo86 4 points5 points  (0 children)

      Moral of the story donating sperm is a risky business - don't do it.

      [–]Momo_dollar 4 points5 points  (0 children)

      She is earning $250k per year, while he is earning $275k per year, only $25k difference, but when she sees the difference in disposable income and lifestyle it pisses her off and she realises what kind of life she could have had if she didn't have to raise a child. So she does it not out of desperation, or to give her child a better life, but allow her to spend more of her money on herself.

      [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      If she wins, his next 3 purchases should be a plane ticket, suitcase, and a pistol.

      [–]Brewjo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Even if she loses 60% of her salary to tax, that's still C$100,000 pa and that $800 pm child care is barely 10% of that per year.

      A couple who have AU$100K after tax every year can manage well with 2 kids (at least in Australia).

      My guess is she wants to piss them off into a private or boarding school... that's why she's "broke". 2 x C$30K tuition as a single mother is so... so... unfair!!

      [–]meninistMD 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      I am amused, there is still people who read MSN news??

      [–]goldnhorde 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      these kids are 16 ..... I would like to know all parties income at the time they decided to play "put the lime in the coconut and drink it on up".

      Did the gay guy suddenly start making some big money????

      [–][deleted] 0 points0 points

      [permanently deleted]

      [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Big fucking surprise right?

      She couldn't give pussy away for free

      [–]LoserWithHugeTits 2 points3 points  (14 children)

      "She signed an agreement in 2002 stating that she will not seek financial support from him"

      For the love of God, stop saying this. Support is the right of the child, not the mother. A mother cannot sign away support for another person. I cringe every time I see this like I do when people say Facebook is violating their free speech rights like Facebook is the government. States have laws that guarantee support for a child from biological parents, (and sometimes non-biological but that's another matter) and one cannot just say "Oh, I'll sign away my future child's rights to that support." Just like your mother can't sign away your right to own a firearm or vote for certain candidates, she can't sign away support for a future human. The government makes this robust and clear because an infant can't bring a case, hire a lawyer, etc., to exercise it's rights.

      I've been through this, my parents had dead even split custody, we all ended up estranged from my mother, my Dad was still paying, he eventually filed to get it adjusted, he won to get support from her, she's never paid, he didn't pursue because he's a bigger person.

      I agree the current family laws are extremely wrong, but if you are a guy who thinks a mother can sign away rights of another person who doesn't even exist, you are stupid and I don't feel sorry for you.

      [–][deleted] 25 points26 points  (0 children)

      Maybe the reason people fail to make that distinction is that the mother is not required to spend child support money on the children.

      [–]Endorsed Contributorzyk0s 17 points18 points  (8 children)

      And I cringe when I see someone defend it as "the right of the child". Who is getting the money? Not the child, the mother (or the custodial parent of you want to include your very rare case). And there is no legal requirement to spend that money on the child, so how does it have anything to do with "the rights of the child"?

      [–]GuitarHero07 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      You are right. But the family court system has nothing to do with justice or fairness in reality. It's just a big money making racket for the judges and lawyers.

      [–]Limekill 3 points4 points  (6 children)

      You really think the courts want to deal with that? They are already dealing with the all the other issues (finances, spousal support, child support, care arrangements, allegations of assault, etc). And of course there would be MANY Expensive Legal fights about what constitute spending on children - can you spend it on a 'family' holiday? what about furniture? Does a car count? Does petrol count? If the mother buys some nice dinner plates - does that count? Should she of bought a plastic set instead? etc.

      The cases Would be endless. The courts do not want to open that black hole.

      Of course I will be downvoted.

      [–]MakeEmSayAyy 3 points4 points  (1 child)

      Yeah cuz you're being a faggot. If there's an issue, then give the child to the other parent if they're willing to take it as an option instead of extorting money.

      That'll save the precious child and the father will be able to do without financially bankrupting everyone in the process.

      [–]Limekill 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      what happens if the father starts to spend it on a new GF? - So the mother will take it back to court and so you want even more court cases?

      Yeah cuz you're being a faggot.

      Hey if your dream is to make lawyers even richer - go for it!

      [–]Endorsed Contributorzyk0s 1 point2 points  (3 children)

      So you admit that it's for the mom's lifestyle, and has nothing to do with the rights of the child. If you can't afford to raise a kid, you should give custody to the parent that can.

      And yes, I'm speaking purely from principles, I know that's not how the law works currently.

      [–]Limekill 0 points1 point  (2 children)

      So you admit that it's for the mom's lifestyle

      No - its for the expense of raising a child.

      How about you tell us what % of women do NOT spend it on the children?

      [–]Endorsed Contributorzyk0s 0 points1 point  (1 child)

      Uh, zero? They don't spend it on the child, they put the money in their bank account, so it becomes their money. Separately, as a parent, they spend some of their own money on the child.

      It's funny, when you go on a business trip, you company pays for your stuff, but it doesn't just deposit a couple hundreds in your bank account. No, it makes you submit an expense report, with reasonable limits on various categories. Now you tell me what's unfair about that latter arrangement, and I'll believe child support, as it is currently practiced, is just and "for the welfare of the child".

      [–]Limekill -1 points0 points  (0 children)

      Uh, zero? They don't spend it on the child, they put the money in their bank account, so it becomes their money. Separately, as a parent, they spend some of their own money on the child.

      So you admit that most parents spend the money on the children. But under your new scheme every month they submit an expense report and then what? - the man decided what he considers 'fair' and then pays? Or does the court decides whats 'fair'? If its 'unfair' what happens? What infrastructure do we have to put in place to police this?

      Look most adults are responsible - people tend to pay their taxes, register their cars and not commit crimes. The courts assume people are going to be responsible and for the most part they are. The payment is calculated by looking at each parent's percentage of care, living expenses of both adults and the costs of raising a child. In fact I would hazard a guess that if you looked at all the cases on average the money received would not not cover all the child's expenses. In Australia if you are on $180k+ you have to give up $21k. Let me know how many parents think their spawn only costs $21k? Fuck... you are spending more than that on school fees alone!

      [–]dejour 4 points5 points  (0 children)

      OK, that's a reasonable perspective.

      But if that's the case, then no one would ever agree to be a sperm donor. Meaning that a whole bunch of children would never be born. If you had a choice between never being born and being supported by just one parent earning $250K per year, I think most people would prefer to be born.

      Lastly, maybe some wording needs to be adjusted in contracts, but couldn't you just say, "Jane agrees to fully reimburse John for all child support costs." In that case, the child is still getting everything they are owed, it's just that the mom is reimbursing the sperm donor for all of that.

      [–]rp_newdawn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Thank you very much for clarifying that

      [–]jason2k[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

      I agree with some of what you said though not entirely. I don't view their agreement as signing her children's right to support away, because like you said, she has no right to; I view it as more of an understanding that she will raise them by herself and never go after him for money. If the kids go after the father for support, that's fine because it is their right.

      Just because it is or might be legal doesn't mean it's morally correct. If he knew this would happen I don't think he would've helped her out in the first place.

      [–]LordThunderbolt -1 points0 points  (0 children)

      Your dad wasn't the bigger person, he was the weaker person. Let's be real here.

      [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      So, the basic rule here is don't donate sperm. Cases like this are horrible news for all the sterile couples out there who can't conceive. Bad facts make bad law.

      [–]doveenigma13 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Find out how much it is for her to live with teenagers and broken feet.