[centurion316]

When rights of a minor are involved, the courts have very little leeway. It has nothing to do with gay marriage. I suspect you are right, but it will also have the effect of bringing sperm donation to a screeching halt. Only winos and drug addicts will donate after this fiasco, regardless of the ultimate outcome.

[erkelly]

Which is all for the best. Men should take responsibility about where they spread their sperm, the children resulting from such unions, are indeed THEIR children, and they should only bring those children into this world that they are personally capable of fathering, and willing to do so. (And the same thing goes for egg donors.) This is a wickedness that needs to stop.

[Venturer]

I hope they bust this fool wide open.

[Mercat]

No. You don’t understand. In Kansas and I’m guessing in most states. there is a special statute for sperm donations but they have to be done anonymously through a doctor or clinic. That filter protects the sperm donor from future claims by the mother or the child. What is not understood is that the child him/herself has a claim on the father for up to three years after he/she reaches majority. This is the child’s claim and can only be blocked by statute.