Skip to comments.Surrogate mom who kept kids must pay dad
Posted on 03/16/2006 9:55:43 AM PST by mlc9852
A surrogate mother breached a contract when she secreted away the triplets she delivered for a would-be Kirtland father and set out to raise them at her Pennsylvania home, an appellate court ruled Wednesday.
The 9th Ohio District Court of Appeals ordered Danielle Bimber to reimburse James Flynn her $20,000 surrogate's fee plus child-support that Flynn has been required to pay as the biological father of the three boys. The decision was unanimous.
Presiding Judge Lynn C. Slaby used the opinion to implore state legislators to tackle the complicated issue of surrogacy, which is not addressed under state statutes. He wrote that Ohio has "failed to address the rapid technological advances of surrogacy."
The legal fight over the triplets started soon after the boys took their first breaths in November 2003. Court cases stretch across three states - Ohio, Pennsylvania and Indiana - and involve multiple parties, including egg donor Jennifer Rice, a Texas college student who sued for parental rights.
(Excerpt) Read more at cleveland.com ...
"must pay back" dad seems more accurate than "must pay" dad. What about pain and suffering? Aren't men allowed to be compensated for that?
I have no opinion. Just wanted to see what others thought about this mess.
Wow, what a mess. I wonder how the surrogate's husband feels about all this...
I think this is a reasonable judgment based on contract law. Good for the judge!
I'm quite surprised its legal.
men's rights ping
No-brainer. You don't get to take the guy's check, not fulfill your part of the deal, and keep the money.
What an unbelievable story. I didn't know this type of thing went on. A third party provides ova....? These kids are not related what so ever to the surrogate, Bimber. Flynn is 64, fiance is 61....wow! Can you imagine taking on triplets at that age?
What a mess!
What a mess.
The poor boys. no matter what happens, it's so screwed up for them!
If the surrogate's husband divorces her, the child support issue would be a major mess.
I don't know, but (I know I'm gonna get flamed for this) the dad/sperm donor is 64 years old. The surrogate mom is 31. I think the kids are better off with her then "dad".
Bimber's reaction: Stuned.
I wonder how this links to the case of the guy trying to sever support with the woman who tricked him and had a kid by him. Looks like my joke of "Sue her for the child support he's been giving her" is a real possibility.
"Pain and suffering" is one of the biggest perversions of both the courts and money we have. People should be paid in money when it's money they lost. Non monetary losses are just that.
Other than that quibble with ~your~ post, the decision appears to be a good one. :~D
"I don't know, but (I know I'm gonna get flamed for this) the dad/sperm donor is 64 years old. The surrogate mom is 31. I think the kids are better off with her then "dad"."
That is the most.......stop.
...involve multiple parties, including egg donor Jennifer Rice, a Texas college student who sued for parental rights
Don't forget the egg-donor. The "mom" had NO biological relationship to the kids. Why does she get to keep them. What if I took someone's child from the hospital? Would having "possession" of them give me an advantage in court? These babies were cooked in her, but she didn't provide the ingredients.....
Even if the parents live for another 30 years the idea of having three adolescents around when they are in their seventies may make them wish for death.
I found it rough in my thirties.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.