Posted on 01/23/2014 6:05:28 AM PST by Mrs. Don-o
Edited on 01/23/2014 6:12:15 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
Topeka resident William Marotta had argued that he had waived his parental rights and didn
(Excerpt) Read more at kansascity.com ...
Shakespeare was right!!!
Lol....well said...
ok hate lawyers
but when people are in trouble, that is who they call first
SUCKER!!!
Good point!
This same type of story pops up every few years about some sperm doner who didn’t know you can’t contract away these responsiblities and was too cheap to get the advice of an attorney before signing the dotted line.
Fact is a lot of their problems wouldn’t be a problem but for the lawyers!!
sez you but you don’t know
Then he should get visitation. He ain’t an ATM.
I’d say if the lesbos want to play like they’re “normal” people, the “partner” that didn’t bear the child is responsible for the child support.
You don’t get to try to be like normal people when it suits you and not when it doesn’t.
What was done was outside of common law and therefore required the parties to follow the statute. The judge has to follow the law. So if we in Kansas want things changed on issues like this, we have to go to the Kansas Legislature. That’s how it works. But having just reviewed the Kansas statutes on this issue, I remain confused since it only seems to talk about “husband and wife.” See K.S.A. 23, Article 23.
So, let’s see here. As it turns out, the “donor” got screwed without getting screwed. (Please excuse my coarse language.)
Maybe not “tit for tat,” but Mother Nature tends to equalize accounts on Her own time frame.
Another prime reason the KEEP YOUR ZIPPER ZIPPED UP!
The Mom, by the way (if you read the whole article) separated from her ... uh... "partner at the time" and got on public assistance. That's what triggered this whole thing. She lied to the State that she didn't know the identity of the sperm-vendor, but forgot that the contract between Marotta and the couple includes his name, and the couple talked about their appreciation for him in an interview with The Capital-Journal(!!)
Honest question: If a man is kidnapped, force fed viagra and raped by a very attractive woman and she gets pregnant, is he liable for child support?
On one hand, the two lesbian “parents” agreed to be responsible for the child and he was doing them a favor, so it is sort of unfair to hold him responsible.
On the other hand, donating sperm to conceive a child to be raised in such a “family” is sick and immoral (though I’m sure in his eyes he was trying to do a “good thing”.)
Are you asking for a volunteer to test this scenario??
The problem I see from all of this is.....
1. The child will have NO father.
2. It solidifies the idiocy of “you always need a lawyer”.
3. The “State” always wants to be in control of our lives.
You need to post that bit of creative writing on some “other” forum... :)
Courts have actually ruled that men who have been paying support for a child which they thought was theirs, on discovering (via dna analysis) that it is not theirs, are still required to pay support.
It’s an interesting “game”. A lot of potential Timothy McVeighs are being created by our court system.
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.