Court: Man Can Sue Over Surprise Pregnancy

[Kadie]

Court: Man Can Sue Over Surprise Pregnancy

Thursday, February 24, 2005

(02-24) 09:55 PST Chicago (AP) --


An appeals court said a man can press a claim for emotional distress after learning a former lover had used his sperm to have a baby. But he can't claim theft, the ruling said, because the sperm were hers to keep.


snip...
Phillips accuses Dr. Sharon Irons of a "calculated, profound personal betrayal" after their affair six years ago, saying she secretly kept semen after they had oral sex, then used it to get pregnant.


He said he didn't find out about the child for nearly two years, when Irons filed a paternity lawsuit. DNA tests confirmed Phillips was the father, the court papers state.


Phillips was ordered to pay about $800 a month in child support, said Irons' attorney, Enrico Mirabelli.


Phillips sued Irons, claiming he has had trouble sleeping and eating and has been haunted by "feelings of being trapped in a nightmare," court papers state.

more...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2005/02/24/national/a095250S07.DTL

[Skidmore]

AAAhhhh, jeez louise...what is it

with people these days?

[Goblinmonger]

1. That's rich

I love irony. Bet he didn't think about that we he asked for the blowjob. :+

[gorbal]

4. It's enough that she never told him about the child

Imagine not being told you had a child, jesus.

[KingoftheJungle]

6. It was an obvious scheme to rip him off on child support payments

That is one shady ass bitch, if I say so myself.

[BrendaStarr]

127. But maybe it will spur men getting real birth control

Really we have needed that for some time.

And I can't wait to see them bloating for sex.

[LisaL]

46. Not never, LOL. 2 years.

[LiberalFighter]

87. I know that feeling

6 years before being told and not for the right reason.

[Javaman]

152. That's an interesting statement...

How could one possibly imagine not being told something?

[BadGimp]

73. who does?

B-)

[whistle]

2. So bizarre....

:wtf: :freak:

[Demit]

3. I'm really trying to work up some sympathy for Mr. Phillips here...

oops, can't.

[eyesroll]

10. Why not?

By everyone's account, the man only participated in acts that a reasonable person knows do not cause pregnancy. So it's not like he was taking the risk of having sex and then bailing on the consequence of the risk. I'd have no sympathy for him in that situation -- then again, that would be a standard paternity suit and wouldn't be making headlines.

His "feelings of being trapped in a nightmare" might be hard on the kid, but at the same time...

[Goldmund]

13. I agree.

[Ellen Forradalom]

15. It's a very rude surprise for him

And a series of despicably deceptive acts on her part.

[Demit]

19. Well, I'm not saying the woman's a paragon either--I think it's sleazy

of her to turn around and sue for child support. But I don't mind him finding out that actions have consequences. He thought he was just getting serviced, and he could zip up and forget about it?

I guess I just got a feeling of Aha! This guy won't be so casual the next time he participates (participates?) in his BJs. The days of them not causing pregnancy are gone.

[lazarus]

21. great

let's just increase the hostility and suspicion between the sexes, that'll make things so much better.

[Demit]

27. Who is doing that?

I'm suggesting an increased awareness of responsibility. Now he knows what's possible these days. So in the old days a sneaky woman could get pregnant the conventional way. These days maybe a guy should think about protection even with a BJ--for himself and his "boys".

Not to get too crude here, but a BJ is not the first thing a woman thinks of as a gloriously, satisfyingly wonderful sex experience that she just can't wait to have again. It's called "pleasuring" a man for a reason. It's designed for a man's pleasure, not a woman's.

I think the whole situation is wretched. I think the woman's duplicity is sad, and her action in bringing a paternity suit deplorable. But the guy is not an innocent bystander. He thought he was "getting" something, and he thought it could have no consequences. Turns out it can, and it's a good lesson for men to learn.

[lazarus]

29. a good lesson?

making a man a father against his will is a "good lesson"?

$800/month. Let's assume that doesn't increase in the future (I guarantee it will, though.)

That means he's been forced to pay $172,800 for a blowjob that a woman voluntarily gave him.

Let's reverse the issue: He gives her oral sex. (Designed for a woman's pleasure, not a man's.) After she falls asleep, he impregnates her, without her knowledge. Then she is prevented from having an abortion.

Is that a "good lesson" that she shouldn't trust men?

As for protection "even with a blowjob", what you're advocating is that men simply no longer trust women. Great. That'll help society a lot.

This guy was an innocent bystander. He did something that any rational person would believe would have no consequences, because it is physically impossible for it to result in pregnancy unless something like this happens. Have you ever heard of something like this before? I sure haven't.

[Demit]

47. well, women used to be asked to trust a man who said of course I'll

respect you in the morning. Or of course I'm going to call you. Women have learned to have some measure of healthy skepticism. Some men do call. But women don't blindly trust anymore. Yes, that's a good lesson. In life we learn lessons in self-preservation all the time, and we learn to somehow balance that with our trust in others.

Your reverse scenario doesn't quite work because he's not impregnating her via the oral sex. A closer analogy might be if he had told her he had had a vasectomy, and she went ahead and had unprotected sex with him based on that. I don't know if you're guy or gal, but if you're a gal I'd bet your instinct would be "that's nice, but I think I'll use this here diaphragm anyway, just in case" because you know what the consequences could be for you.

Look, this woman tricked the guy, no question. But that's not a new phenomenon. It just strikes me that the outrage here, partly, is from guys who are pissed because this is a new way to get tricked that they didn't see, you should pardon the pun, coming. It's not the blow job he's paying the big bucks for; it's for not realizing the potential of the sperm he left behind.

[Name removed]

104. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[histohoney]

156. You never

mention the child. The real end result of this is a child who will or is now hurt by all this. I just don't find it funny or ironic, just cruel to that child.
That boy doesn't deserve this.

[Name removed]

167. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mugweed]

178. Not that new

Sounds like a dumbass man to me.

[LisaL]

62. Men shouldn't trust women, and women shouldn't trust men-

if they don't know them all that well, as sounds the case here.

[Tansy_Gold]

108. Men should respect women and women should respect men

and not engage in sex where they don't accept responsibility for the results.

[DoNotRefill]

118. Ummm....if they just had oral sex....

what responsibility comes from that?

If he actually had a kind of sex with her that could result in a pregnancy under normal circumstances, that's fine, he has to face the responsibility for that. But a blowjob? What reasonable person would think that a blowjob would have even a TINY chance of conception attached to it???

[Demeter]

72. Just As the Right Wing Religious Anti-Choice will Force Women

to be mothers against their wills. Sauce for the gander, and an object lesson to us all.

[geomon666]

84. Don't have sex with doctors.

That's the only lesson I see here. That story is just...creepy. How that woman planned, plotted, and excuted her scheme is beyond bizarre.

[Mr. Sinister]

34. your view of sexual relations seems a little reductive

I don't think it just comes down to who gets the big
O. People have sex for all sorts of reasons and getting
off I think is not at the very top. You can just masturbate
for that. I think people look to feel connected, loved,
allay loneliness, whatever. I think both parties can be
very satisfied with just a one way blow job -- at least
that has been my experience. ;)
To have to be terrified of semen leaving your body
because it might be used to create life without your
consent for which you are then completely responsible
seems well yeah a nightmare.

[LisaL]

45. But when sex results in children, court obviously doesn't care

what their motives were to have sex. The court cares what is in the best interest of the child.

[Mr. Sinister]

well how does it work with sperm banks?

When you donate sperm to a sperm bank are you responsible for all the children that are produced with your sperm? Would I have to provide financial support if I donated? How much less so should someone who is not even giving his sperm for procreation as opposed to someone who is specifically doing so. If this women did indeed take his sperm as he says and deliberately impregnated herself, I don't see why he should be legally liable. What if I soil hotel sheets and the maid uses it? Sorry shouldn't have had a nocturnal emission. I mean jesus where do you draw the line?

[Demit]

61. Don't be terrified, then. Take it with you.

Now that you realize it might create life and you don't want it to.

A one way blow job (as opposed to--?): yes, Mr. Sinister, I agree, it is your experience. First and foremost. I'm not saying that it's not a part of making love and that women don't willingly do it; my point is, its primary purpose is for the man's pleasure. The man "gets" the BJ, the woman "gives' it. Is that really so controversial a concept?

[Mr. Sinister]

78. Well I am clearly out of my depths here.

As I don't have sex with women I guess I am losing something in translation. Apparently the very act of achieving an orgasm in the presence of a woman (unless you manage to hold on to that condom
or scrape it into a doggie bag) means your in the daddy lottery. As to your one way querys, I do have a vague memory about the possibility of oral sex being mutual and contemporaneous. Least that's how it works on my side of the fence. ;-)

But Uncle -- I concede the man is a fool and he and
all other men should well consider this new added benefit
to homosexuality.

[DoNotRefill]

119. then let me ask you this...

suppose you and your male same-sex partner were engaged in consentual acts, which were very, very, VERY unlikely to result in a pregnancy. Then suppose your partner, without your knowledge or permission, took the result of that, gave it to a woman, who then used it to be artificially inseminated, and then sued you for child support. Wouldn't you feel violated?

[Mr. Sinister]

128. Sure I still think it's outrageous

But I just don't know how to talk about this any more without
being the object of someone's very strong emotion on this topic. I've lurked along time now at DU and now I sort of know why. I can't take the heat. :-( I undertand both sides: men can be selfish pigs and people have been enflamed by some ugly stuff spewed on this thread. On the other hand it sure seems like a violation to have responsibility for an unintended child just because men produce semen and it might occasionally escape from them. So I'm just throwing up my hands in the air.

[bloom]

155. It is sort of interesting

to sit back and watch how a story like this brings out the emotional reactions on both sides.

People all seemed to believe that this guy was telling the truth - for some reason. Now someone has posted the other side of the story...

"But the lawyer for Irons, who also is a Chicago physician, says the baby was conceived the usual way and that Phillips has concocted a story to get out of paying child support."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0502250262...


Women have had to deal with getting pregnant against their will since the beginning of time - so it interesting to me to see how men have reacted to this.

[Mr. Sinister]

159. who will argue about a guy who conceives a baby the usual way?

Everyone can agree he needs to pay up. The interesting aspect of this was the twist of a man involved in a pregnancy "against his will". It seems interesting legally, intelletually, philosophically. But it clearly is not a cool abstract question. It taps into alot of pain and obviously hurtful personal experience. I hope I don't merrily skip into a minefield like this again.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

153. That goes for heteros too. I guarantee you that.

She was a swindling bitch. He was innocent. End of story.

There's no way to know whether HE gave HER oral sex too on that occasion.

[LiberalFighter]

91. Don't have to take it with you... just sterilize in water

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

154. Ahhh, the universal solution -- NO SEX!

Now, what political persuation most often offers that as a solution? Help me, I forgot.

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[uhhuh]

132. Interesting

There are some women who get tremendous pleasure out of them.

UGH... I didn't want to have to get too graphic here, but...

I dated a woman for a good deal of time that seem to ALWAYS want to give BJs. It was practically a demand from her. She seemd to enjoy it quite a lot, so I let her. I enjoyed her company quite a bit and I still miss her, but I never really cared much for BJs. They don't do much for me.

[LiberalFighter]

89. Best preventative... snip snip

[DoNotRefill]

163. unless, of course....

the woman in question is a doctor, she drugs you, extracts semen from your testicles themselves (bypassing the vasectomy), and then self-impregnates. Under current law, if this happens, you're still the daddy.

The only way for a man to avoid parenthood is to commit suicide in a manner that his entire body is destroyed before it can be looted for it's DNA.

[LiberalFighter]

168. In that case I would pursue having her license revoked

getting custody of the kid

and having her ovaries removed

[DoNotRefill]

169. Why? You wouldn't be the patient...

instead, you'd be the daddy. After all, you got your sperm where she could get pregnant...even though she'd need a needle to do it.

[ldf]

97. she is a parasite

and is not fit to be a mother.

he should spend his resources proving just that.

and blow jobs do NOT cause a pregnancy.

with the exception of unless you are a scheming, conniving piece of shit (at least i didn't use bitch) who is out to bleed the guy for every penny you can get, through no fault of his own.

oh, that's right, it is his fault. he came in her mouth.

this makes my blood boil.

:grr:

edited to correct an error.

[bhairava]

113. What a quaint view of sex...

"He thought he was just getting serviced"

I mean really, how dare he! I think I just got all the hysteria about Clinton/Lewinsky. Soem people really have a problem with the FORM of sex. Also, clearly, no woman could actually enjoy sex (which includes BJ's). No, such sex is "service" and NEVER initiated by women. Of course, such silliness is never said about men when they perform the same thing on women. There seems to be an assumption of what roles must be played. Sex must exact a price (no free lunch); women must be compensated for defiling themselves by having it. F*** that!

[tblue37]

124. Getting a blow job is not evil.

If she was willing to give him one, why should he not have been willing to have one if he wanted to? Why would he ever have imagined that it would end up like this?

Also, he might very well have performed oral sex on her too, so it need not have been just a matter of her "servicing" him. It might have been a very enjoyable mutual exchange.

You seem angry at the very idea that men sometimes get blow jobs. Why?

[chopper]

172. exactly

"But I don't mind him finding out that actions have consequences."

exactly. now the guy knows that one of the consequences of a blowjob is someone might get pregnant.

wait a minute...

[HuckleB]

176. Umm.

How do you know he's telling the truth?

[chopper]

180. well

whether he is or not, my concern is this idea that people 'have to realize' that one of the consequences of a BJ is that you might knock someone up. that's just crazy.

[HuckleB]

181. Actually...

if both partners are naked, depending on where the sperm lands, it is possible that a man might just knock someone up. It's happened before, and it is far more viable than the bizarre story Phillips is trying to convince us all to believe.

[chopper]

183. yeah...

and there's a chance i might be walking down the street, slip and fall on a dirty soup spoon and contract HIV somehow.

sorry, but i'm not digging the 'if you get a BJ, you may just impregnate someone' angle.

besides, when has it happened accidentally before?

[HuckleB]

184. The scenario I just outlined...

has happened more often than most people think. No, it's not common, and it's unlikely, but it's far more likely than the story this guy gave the court and look how many fools bought his story here at DU.

[chopper]

185. do you have any proof?

not to be a bitch, but is there any cite you can give me to prove that that scenario occurs from time to time?

[HuckleB]

186. Hit a health science library.

The scenario has been proven viable, and reports of it occur fairly frequently. Unfortunately, the best info. regarding health issues is not available online, at least not without spending time that I don't have searching for it. I am a health care professional, however. And I have read the literature on this. I didn't pull it out of my ass. Believe me, I was skeptical myself.

[LiberalFighter]

88. If he wore a condom she probably would had done the same with sperm

[Anakin Skywalker]

80. Same Here.

[Blue_Tires]

5. oh, fuck that shit

i've heard of scheming women before, but this is world-class.....this is the year I'm getting snipped

[Ellen Forradalom]

14. Let's leave the misogyny out of this

The fact that she commited a deceitful, dastardly deed is sufficient.

[NashVegas]

7. I Feel Sorry For the Guy. Truly.

But on behalf of every woman who didn't want to swallow, I'm still going to snicker over this:

"She asserts that when plaintiff 'delivered' his sperm, it was a gift — an absolute and irrevocable transfer of title to property from a donor to a donee," the decision said.

[Samurai_Writer]

25. Gives a whole new meaning to...

"You want me to give it to you, baby?" LOL

That said, the woman is in the wrong here. She intentionally deceived him and then used his sperm to get pregnant (how? with a turkey baster?). And NOW she wants child support? I say the guy should sue for custody and make HER pay child support.

[LisaL]

43. You are assuming he wants to raise the child-a child

he never even wanted to have. He should sue for custody even though it seems pretty clear he doesn't want to raise the child and never wanted him to begin with?

[Samurai_Writer]

51. Of course not...

It was mainly tongue-in-cheek. However, there have been men who have been 'surprised' by fatherhood, who, after the initial shock, have made great fathers and are raising their kids. If he doesn't want to raise a child, of course he should not. But if he does, he should have that option.

[wordslikelead]

8. hahah...

That's fresh. I always thought about how that would suck. I'm really amused that what I once thought was just a silly idea in my head, has now happened.

Serves him right for having any affair though.

[Megahurtz]

20. But there is nothing in this article that says

that he had an "affair while he was married to someone else"
It just sounds like a "love affair"

[histohoney]

9. That poor little boy.

How selfish of that woman. Some day that poor child will learn all about this and feel just horrible.
Like I've said before, I don't really care what to CONSENTING adults do but you need to be way careful before you bring a child into the picture.

Her attorney tried to use the boy, how sad she should have thought about that FIRST.

This man is not a kid person it sounds like. I have no problem with that, he didn't try to have one. He did what was right. You don't want a child or your unable to put the needs of a child first, don't have one.

Shame on her.

[Walt Starr]

11. Notice that child support is not in dispute!

The courts are consistent, I'll give them that. child support is all about the child regardless of the mother and father, so child support from the man in this case is not in dispute.

If I were him, I'd be suing for custody.

[MADem]

164. I agree

Sick situation, all round. The kid, of course, will suffer. They always do, poor little things.

[Igel]

12. He should have feelings of being trapped in a nightmare.

He is.

Paternity? Child support? Stupid judge.

[HuckleB]

170. What?

He's being asked to be a responsible father? Oh no. How terrible?

:eyes:

[bluedeminredstate]

16. Sick, weirdo hag!

As a woman, I cannot believe her defense is that he gave her a "gift" so that makes it fine that she impregnated herself.
She plotted to make him a father against his will since he had no say in the matter and could not have known what she was planning. Who could? Well, maybe on a soap...
There are fertility clinics with sperm for sale. Why not go there? It would seem much easier to achieve her goal that way, which makes it seem that she intended to deceive him and by her actions cause him to become a father.
This chick is one pathological piece of work!

[Mandate My Ass]

17. Yes she is, sick and vengeful

but the misogyny and painting with the broad brush has already started on this thread and mark my words it'll get much worse soon.

[Tansy_Gold]

22. Yeah, I love the post that says

"he did what was right."


gag me with a. . . .


AFAIC, he had complete control over what he was doing with his sperm and he was more concerned with his illicit pleasure and damn the consequences. Bill Clinton almost lost his presidency (and the US taxpayers lost $70M) over a blowjob, so I don't know what this poor schmuck is whining about.

If you want control over your sperm, KEEP IT TO YOURSELF.

[AngryAmish]

48. That's right - men should never have sex

the brutes!

[LisaL]

60. No, but if they do have sex, they should expect

there could be un-wanted consequences.

[AngryAmish]

71. I would hate to live like that

One participates in a non-procreative sex act. Then one participant turns it into a procreative act without the others permission. He did not have it coming. It is not usual or reasonable to anticipate having to support a kid (not to mention all the time he has to spend if he is any sort of a man). Plus, every time he goes over to pick up his kid he has to look at this whack-job. Plus, his child is being raised by a patent whack-job.

[TheWraith]

83. So, only women deserve control over their reproductive capability?

This woman forced this man to have a child against his will. If the genders were reversed, I'd be deaf from the screaming of bloody murder coming from this thread. Instead, it's an attitude of "Oops, well, you have to expect that when you have sex." From that logic, abortion shouldn't be legal for unintended pregnancies, because that's what's to be expected when you have sex.

[DoNotRefill]

121. What if he masturbated into a tissue and threw it away....

and she came behind him, dug it out of the trash, and used it to get pregnant?

Oral sex alone shouldn't lead to pregnancy.

[RapidCreek]

160. Why?

You mean I should expect that woman I have sex with will lie about being on birth control, go in the bathroom and take our spent condom out of the trash, save the sperm inside and impregnate herself with it?

I should expect this sort of behavior out of women, should I? Talk about misogyny. You don't think to highly of women, do you?


RC

[tblue37]

129. Help me out here.

Why is having sex "illicit pleasure"? Is it because it was a blow job? Why is a blow job "illicit pleasure"? Does that mean that if a woman get oral sex, that is also "illicit pleasure."

Or is it pleasure itself that is "illicit"?

I am amazed at the rage and disgust I see on this thread over the very idea of a man having sex, especially if it is a blow job.

Are you all Puritans?

[Tansy_Gold]

131. "Illicit" only in the sense that

it was outside of marriage.

She was married to someone else at the time.

[tblue37]

151. He claims he didn't know that,

but when he found out, that was why he ended the relationship. The stories are he said/she said, but at the moment we have no particular reason to believe one over the other. If she was married and he didn't know,then she was having "illicit sex," but he really wasn't.

[Anakin Skywalker]

82. Maybe this guy is incredibly

good-looking and this selfless woman just wanted to pass on his great genes??? :)

Women are like that, ya know. They only want to have babies with hunky males.

[Megahurtz]

18. Okay, this woman is really sick.

You can't really blame the man because I am assuming that this was consentual. No wonder he's having nightmares. She did trap him.

What an evil freak!:evilgrin::freak:

[LisaL]

40. Now, now-did the woman say she did it?

I think not. If this was a woman accusing a man of rape, would everybody believe right away she is telling the truth? But for some reason, everybody just assumed this man is telling the truth.

[TheWraith]

85. Actually, yes.

If she were accusing him of rape, almost everyone here would instantaneously assume that he was guilty and would decry anyone who didn't put aside things like evidence and legality in order to hop on the lynching bandwagon. And before you protest, the presumption of guilt in such cases is by no means limited to DU.

And for the record, yes, she confessed that she did it. Her legal defense is that the sperm was a gift.

[Tansy_Gold]

90. No, everyone on DU would **not** assume a rapist is guilty,

regardless of the evidence. there's one fucking hell of a lot of misogyny on this board.

This issue of involuntary conception and child support has been argued ad puquam more than once on DU, and no one ever changes her/his mind.

My radical feminist take on this issue:

Patriarchal culture has at its roots the envy men have for women and their ability to produce life. Especially under the various forms of orthodox montheistic religions, women have been made into the source of all evil and men into the only power that can same both themselves from women's evil and save women from women's evil. This shame/guilt construct is ultimately the means by which men gain and exercise control over women's reproductive capacity -- and essentially women's bodies and selves -- since men can't actually acquire it.

In the last few decades, women have been turning the tables. They've acquired not only technology that will allow them to turn their fecundity on and off -- diaphragms, spermicides, oral contraceptives, IUDs, abortion -- but the legal autonomy to practice this control. And some men just can't stand it. They just can't fucking stand it.

So they launch into these arguments about poor, victimized men who are suckered into supporting infants they never wanted, even though these same poor men also whine about how they ought to be free to indulge in their pleasures without incurring any obligations to the potential offspring. Had this guy been forced to "donate" his sperm via fellatio at the point of a gun, that would be a whole different ball game. But let's face it, folks, that ain't what happened.

I've said it before and I'll say it again --

Any time a man lets fly those little homunculi anywhere in the neighborhood of a female egg, he has to be prepared for the possibility of conception and child support. He enters into a contract, not with the woman, but with the child. The woman, however, has a biological contract with herself first and with the fetus second. She, and she alone, has the power to determine if her own viability (by whatever criteria she defines viability) is more important than the fetus's. She can forsake her own claims on the father, but she cannot absolve him of his responsibility to the child. Yes, some women, such as my son-in-law's ex-wife, voluntarily forgo seeking child-support -- in her case, against the father of the child she conceived during a one-night-stand while still married to someone else. But the child always has that right of support.

Yes, sad to say, guys, but this gives the woman an extra "out." Yes, she can get pregnant, and yes, she can get an abortion. (Abortion, however, is not without risk itself, along with pregnancy.) Sorry, too bad, it's not "fair."

But a woman always takes the risk of getting pregnant and the man always takes the risk of having to pay child support. That's just the way it is.

And I know there are some who are going to scream bloody murder about it and I don't fucking care.

This guy wanted his sexual pleasure without any risks. He shoulda had his tubes tied.

No sympathy, case dismissed.



Tansy Gold, militant feminist hard-ass

[ldf]

102. fine. you want to get off?

hop on your dildo.

declare right here and now that you will NEVER have sex again without it being for the purpose of having a child, with someone who is a participant in that decision.

otherwise, anything other than a dildo would be outright hypocrisy on your part.

edit to add,

don't paint feminists with the same broad brush you paint yourself.

i would imagine a true feminist would actually enjoy sex, realizing herself as an equal in the act, and never consider resorting to outright deception to accomplish what this woman has done.

to me that is the antithesis of being a feminist.

[Tansy_Gold]

106. Dear ldf

even though I consider your post a personal attack, I will answer.

I am 56 years old and have been married to the same man since 1969. We have two grown children. Both our daughter-in-law and our daughter are pregnant even as I write this.

I didn't paint anyone with any brush -- I identified myself.

I said that one must accept the responsibility for what might happen. And I ALWAYS did that, before I was married and after.

I never said sex should only be engaged in for the purpose of procreation, I only said people needed to accept the responsibility for what happens if one of them gets pregnant.

Do not EVER put words in my mouth.

[The Animator]

112. Well...

At least word can't get you pregnant...

Sorry couldn't resist. :P

[DoNotRefill]

123. Ummm...

"Any time a man lets fly those little homunculi anywhere in the neighborhood of a female egg, he has to be prepared for the possibility of conception and child support."

So let's say that a woman went to have her "tubes tied", and the doctor performing the surgery, without her consent or knowledge, harvested some eggs, and later turned them into children via in-vitro fertilization. Should she be responsible for the children? I wouldn't think so...

Let's say a man was masturbating in a car in traffic. Suppose that there's a woman in another car next to him, and she somehow gets the sperm and manages to impregnate herself with it. Should he be responsible? How far away from a woman does somebody have to be when releasing homunculi to NOT be responsible for a resulting pregnancy? 50 feet? 500 feet? 50 miles?

[Tansy_Gold]

133. Ummmm, no,

when a man intentionally and voluntarily engages with a woman in an act that will result in the ejaculation of sperm that could fertilize her egg, then he has to be prepared to accept the consequences.

If the ejaculate is not "given" to the woman -- if she does not know him and he does not know her and there is no consensual activity between them, then no, he is not liable.

Look up a little case law and you'll find out. Even in some bizarre cases, the courts have upheld the child support orders.

Read the article and you'll also find out that Dr. Irons is claiming they had regular penile-vaginal intercourse; Dr. Phillips is insisting on the oral sex to artificial insemination story.

The point of all the court cases in favor of obligating men to support the fruit of their loins is that if there were no laws to enforce that support absent "intent to procreate," we'd be right back in the good ol' days when men had all the fun and women had all the grief.

But I'm sure there are lots of folks who wouldn't mind that a bit. And they'd probably all be . . . . men.

[DoNotRefill]

145. Yup, and gun control laws don't apply to whites...

since the legislative intent was to disarm only minorities. Caselaw (from the Florida Supreme Court) says that, too. That doesn't mean it's CORRECT.

It's preposterous that a person can literally impregnate themselves with somebody else's sperm, and the source of the sperm can be held liable.

"when a man intentionally and voluntarily engages with a woman in an act that will result in the ejaculation of sperm that could fertilize her egg, then he has to be prepared to accept the consequences."

By your interpretation, if a man and a woman masturbate themselves individually and separately, and the woman were to grab the semen to impregnate herself with it, the man could be held liable. That is PREPOSTEROUS.

[Pithlet]

95. Almost everyone here?

Yep. Evil womenfolk. We don't have the capability of understanding difficult things like legality and evidence. We're all emotion driven harpies! You sure have us pegged.

[HuckleB]

173. Apparently you didn't read the story.

She confessed no such thing.

[antigone382]

23. This is why I think contraceptive pills for men are a good idea.

Not that I think there are roving bands of women out to use men for baby-making purposes (seeing as I am a woman), but I've known a few male friends who were used in this way. I think it would be a good thing for both men and women, as it would shift some of the burden of preventing unwanted pregnancy off of women, and give men who don't want to be fathers more control over the process.

[Megahurtz]

24. I totally agree.

Then you wouldn't see stuff like this happening.

[nolabels]

26. As a male I think the guy deserves every thing he gets or has to pay for

My two adopted children accept me for the role I play in our family. I try to treat them best as possible (mostly it ends up spoiling them) but we get along. The poor kid is who is at risk, a mother using her children as leverage, that's the sad thing. People need to turn off them soap operas and start thinking about their life in real terms

[lazarus]

30. Why does he deserve it?

Because he got a blowjob, he deserves to have his life ripped to shreds?

It's not like he did anything that any normal person would expect to lead to pregnancy.

[nolabels]

42. It's the thought that counts

Would that also mean all them artificially conceived children don't have legal bound parents?

However his gene sequence got there is of no consequence if he let it go. The women might of been a little underhanded but the ratio that goes the other way is much worse. It's just sad children have to endure this idea of not being wanted by their parents for who they are.

[lazarus]

57. The ratio goes the other way much worse?

So that makes it fair? Right....

[TheWraith]

86. That's an unreasonable point of view.

He did nothing that any reasonable person could possibly consider to be a risk factor for pregnancy. His partner knew this and deliberately went around it in order to force him to become a party to something he didn't want.

If anything that you can't physically prevent is perfectly OK, do you mind if someone photoshops your wife or sister's head onto a porn star's body? Or if your HMO inobtrusively borrows a few skin cells and starts cloning copies of you for parts?

Are you saying you can't reasonably expect anyone you come in contact with not to act like the unbalanced sociopath this woman turned out to be? That if you can't physically enforce consideration for someone else that it has to be discarded?

"the ratio that goes the other way is much worse."

This statement is so weird I can barely begin to fathom it. Are you suggesting that men frequently steal women's eggs in order to produce children without their knowledge? 'Cause that's news to me. Or maybe you mean there's a high incidence of unintended pregnancies in general. In which case, I point out, the woman isn't obligated to reproduce--she has a choice, which this guy never did. If anyone has a high ratio of being forced into parenthood, it's men.

[Tansy_Gold]

93. Please read up on the rightwing attempts (many successful)

to prevent women from being able to terminate unwanted pregnancies (many of which come from non-consensual intercourse.)


1. parental notification laws, and the fortunately defunct FL law requiring women who place children for adoption to publish the details of their sex lives in the newspapers to give the potential fathers the "right" to block any adoption
2. crisis pregnancy centers that lie about being abortion information sources and do their lying best to keep women from terminating unwanted pregnancies.
3. privacy invasions via "late term abortion" records investigations (it's on today's LBN; one of the effects will be to scare women into not even investigating the possibility of an abortion to save their own lives)
4. cuts in funding for poor women's health care, contraceptives, sterilizations (unless, of course, they have a bunch of kids already and are on welfare, then it's forced hysterectomy time cuz we don't wanna have to pay for them brats!)
5. support for hospitals, medical personal, pharmacists, and pharmacies that refuse to carry, dispense, or even educate rape victims about emergency contraception
6. Hyde Amendment, aka global gag rule
7. bills in various states to make all abortion illegal
8. bills in various states and Congress to grant personhood status to fertilized eggs (current case on yesterday's LBN regarding a lawsuit brought for "wrongful death" of a frozen embryo)


that's just a few off the top of my head.

what few reproductive rights women have are constantly under attack, and you'd probably like to whack the rest of them off just because of this one poor, oppressed, tormented guy.

i won't bother to ask you to think about all the children who have grown up in poverty because their mothers didn't have the means to pursue support from deadbeat dads, women who had trusted the "i'll get a divorce and marry you as soon as she's out of the hospital" and similar lines, women who believed their lovers' lies, women who were too young to know what was being done to them.

and the reason i won't bother to ask is because i'm sure there are a whole lot of people here on DU who would rather strip every other woman of the right to control her body and every other child of the right to be supported so as to protect the rights of all the scum-bucket guys who just can't do without sex and don't want to have to face any responsibilities.

[DoNotRefill]

125. ummm....

"and the reason i won't bother to ask is because i'm sure there are a whole lot of people here on DU who would rather strip every other woman of the right to control her body and every other child of the right to be supported so as to protect the rights of all the scum-bucket guys who just can't do without sex and don't want to have to face any responsibilities."

I'm about as rabidly pro-choice as people come. But I don't think that a woman should be able to FORCE somebody to become a parent who didn't have sex with her in a manner that could reasonably (in a biological sense) be seen to lead to conception. This isn't a failed contraceptive device here...this is a sex act that didn't involve contact between reproductive organs. This is no different than a woman who had vaginal sex with a man and then distributed semen to her friends so that they too could conceive, and then THEY sued him for child support.

[Tansy_Gold]

134. Read some of the case law.

Read about the case of the two couples who shared a single condom and turned it inside-out for the second couple. Female #2 got pregnant with Male #1's sperm. He had to pay child support.

Oral sex to avoid pregnancy is no different from using a condom to prevent pregnancy: sometimes it just doesn't work.

He still engaged in a voluntary act that had consequences and he owes a duty of support to the child.

[lazarus]

136. "sometimes" it doesn't work?

How about 'every single time in the history of the universe except this time, it doesn't work'?

[DoNotRefill]

147. It doesn't work...

when one party obtains the sperm under fraudulent pretenses.

You know what this reminds me of? Planned Parenthood et al trying to keep the Operation Rescue freaks away from abortion clinics. That's how we ended up with First Amendment zones.

This is one of those "be careful what you wish for" scenarios.

[DoNotRefill]

146. ROTFLMAO!!!!!

"Oral sex to avoid pregnancy is no different from using a condom to prevent pregnancy: sometimes it just doesn't work."

Please cite a SINGLE CASE where a woman became pregnant by sperm deposited orally WITHOUT her DELIBERATELY doing something to cause fertilization. Just one will do.

You know why oral sex was illegal under the old law, don't you? Because it CAN NOT CAUSE PREGNANCY without deceit.

[clspector]

162. Ack

>>Read about the case of the two couples who shared a single condom and turned it inside-out for the second couple.<<<

Okay, off-topic, but ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.

[chopper]

177. but

"Read about the case of the two couples who shared a single condom and turned it inside-out for the second couple. Female #2 got pregnant with Male #1's sperm. He had to pay child support."

having sex with a woman using a used condom covered in sperm is an act that definitely carries an inherent risk of that woman getting pregnant by accident. you can't really accidentally get pregnant from a BJ, can you?.

[Sterling]

187. I would like to read about that case. Plz post it.

It seems too strange to be true.

[nolabels]

142. I don't know where to begin with any of that

This whole idea sounds just like the ideas the come from the irresponsible people that are occupying the federal government. I haven't noticed any asexual females yet, mostly they cannot have children unless there is someone that gives the other half of the equation.

If the child has part of the father's DNA sequence then he should be responsible for his share in that child's welfare and up-bringing. Fathers rights also come with responsibilities regardless if mother is irresponsible or not. This not about if the mother is worthy or not, it's about another Human being, the child. That's the way the law or even civilization in general sees it (yea bring up them cases where they are not).

The ratio of men impregnating women who have unfavorable circumstances for raising them children is quite high. This should be an easy thing for anybody to understand. So to twist it around and now say the burden is also on the father seems quite a fair thing to do if you ask me. If the guy is too stupid to keep it in pants when circumstances are questionable then he deserves what ever he gets

P.S. I can hear it already, "She wanted it" or "She assured me that she was on the Pill".

[Pithlet]

96. "A little bit underhanded?"

That is the understatement of this thread.

What she allegedly did is absolutely despicable. This isn't a case of two people having sex and an unwanted pregnancy resulting.

That is, if this story is even true. Let's just say I have a healthy skepticism regarding the whole thing.

[nolabels]

144. Regardless of the what skepticism there is or how it happened

If it is proved the guy is the father he should take responsibility that is required. Nobody probably knows or is not telling what exactly she did for sure at any rate. And all the alleges in world cannot change it to him not being the father he is the one.

[Tansy_Gold]

110. His life isn't being "ripped to shreds"

He's being ordered to pay $800 a month in child support. He's not being ordered to change diapers or put the kid through Harvard Medical School. He avoided all the risk of high blood pressure, diabetes, hemorrhoids, muscle cramps, excessive weight gain, and the pain of labor and delivery (or the scar of a cesarian).

He's not being ordered to be a father to this child, to see it, to play ball with it, to go to its graduation, or buy it a car. He doesn't have to teach it how to play baseball, ride a bike, or bait a hook. He doesn't have to read it bedtime stories, bandage its knees or tie its tie for its first date.

All he has to do is write a check once a month and be done with it.


Awww, poor guy. :nopity:

[lazarus]

120. Yeah, poor guy

Let's contribute even more to equating men with checkbooks. Great.

What you seem to miss is that many men think of parenthood as something very serious and important. He's expected to just forget that he has a kid, except for just writing a check once a month?

As for this:

"He avoided all the risk of high blood pressure, diabetes, hemorrhoids, muscle cramps, excessive weight gain, and the pain of labor and delivery (or the scar of a cesarian)."

Sorry about that, but men just don't seem to have the capacity to actually bear children. You can blame us all we want, but it's either evolution or god who did it, your choice.

Would you be as sanguine if the man had stolen one of her eggs, fertilised it, paid a surrogate to bear it, then gone after her for child support based on the DNA match?

[Tansy_Gold]

135. If she had "stolen" his sperm

and gotten pregnant, no, I would not hold him liable.

But she didn't "steal" his sperm. He engaged in a consensual act with her that resulted in an ejaculation of viable sperm.

the court has already ruled on that. The only case now is whether or not he's going to get damages from her on the mental anguish case.

[lazarus]

137. I think the court was wrong

as he engaged in an act that no rational person could expect would lead to pregnancy.

[d_b]

28. What a crazy.....yea.

[ZR2]

31. I hope he wins his suit

and is awarded $172,800.

[AnneD]

32. A cautionary tale if there ever was.....

Don't sleep with the crazies, always,always wear a condom,and don't forget to take care of it yourself.

[Colorado Blue]

33. Quick! Call President Bush! There's another one a' them

LAWSUITS going down over here - wouldn't want THE LAWYERS to make any money behind this:)

Besides he might agree about The Sperm being A Precious Gift (gag).

On second thought, do NOT call President Bush. Call Dr. Strangelove, ASAP! What with all these Precious Bodily Fluids being stolen and all I think we need HELP.

[yellowcanine]

35. Once the "squirt" has left your body, it is "finders keepers" but I

don't think he should have to pay child support. That seems like dirty pool.

[phrenzy]

36. People Are Blaming The VICTIM in this thread.

Good lord. I'm sorry, but it seems to be some kind of perversion of the concept of feminism to express glee over what happened to this guy.


People saying "Well, you shouldn't have 'made' her 'service' you" - give me a fucking break.

This woman is devious and sick and now has given everybody yet another reason not to be able to enjoy sex without worrying.

[LisaL]

39. You are assuming he is telling the truth.

I don't think the woman is confirming it.
So, how is he going to prove that is how she got pregnant, if she says she got pregnant the natural way?

[phrenzy]

41. Huh?

Her whole defense was that he gave her a "gift"

Yeah, evil evil man - he MUST be a liar dammit!

[LisaL]

50. Sounds like she does admit it.

What confused me is that higher court ruled "that, IF Phillips' story is true, Irons "deceitfully engaged in sexual acts, which no reasonable person would expect could result in pregnancy, to use plaintiff's sperm in an unorthodox, unanticipated manner yielding extreme consequences."
Since the court ruled "IF the story is true", I assumed that it hasn't been proven that it happened the way he says it did.

[shugah]

115. the decision of the court

was that he gave a gift - the article does not state that was her defense.

in fact - for everyone who did not click the link and read the complete article:

Dr. Richard O. Phillips accuses Dr. Sharon Irons of a "calculated, profound personal betrayal" six years ago, but she says they had the baby through sexual intercourse.

so really, it's a he says/she says case.

sidenote: a doctor pays a paltry $800/month child support????!!! damn, he got off easy!!

[Skittles]

65. women always worry about sex

comes with the territory

[Tansy_Gold]

94. "Without worrying."

Wouldn't it be better if people just accepted that there are risks and they might face future obligations?

"Look, honey, before we do this, let's understand that one of us could get pregnant and the other one could have to pay chld support for 18 years. Do we want to risk that?"

I think most people who really care about each other consider this an acceptable risk.

It's when you want pleasure without any risk that I say that's unreasonable.

But I guess if you just want free, irresponsible, mindless fucking with any old partner. . . . .

[chopper]

179. well

"Look, honey, before we do this, let's understand that one of us could get pregnant"

the day i have to have that talk before giving someone a blowjob is the day i give up sex forever.

[genieroze]

37. What a sick skank, that's so desperate. eom

[Walt Starr]

38. He played this wrong, he should have sued for custody of the child

then SHE would have to pay child support.

[LisaL]

44. Well, excuse me. That child is living being, and that guy never

wanted to have him. But just cause of money, he should sue for custody, even though he doesn't want to raise the child? The child is not a toy.

[Walt Starr]

52. BULLSHIT!!!!!! Child Support was NEVER AT ISSUE!

Read the damn case. He's paying child support. That is not at issue.

[Capn Sunshine]

54. 18+ years of child support for a blowjob

THAT my friends is a Stiff price

pun intended.
:evilgrin:

[Walt Starr]

55. If I was in his position, I'd sue for custody

and cite her character in deception at not revealing parenthood for two years as cause.

With a good attorney, her visitation rights could also be severely curtailed.

[LisaL]

63. Well, you would also have to raise a child you never wanted

in a first place. I presume this guy has no wish to raise this child.

[Walt Starr]

64. Lots of people raise children they never wanted in the first place

Most of them are single women. Doesn't mean they do't do a good job of raising the child and it doesn't mean they don't love the child.

[LisaL]

74. Yes, but they obviously did not get a child on purpose if

you say they did not want to have the child in the first place. You are suggesting this guy should purposefully get the child he doesn't want just so he doesn't have to pay child support.

[Walt Starr]

75. I know three different men who ended up winning custody from the women

over children that were in no way wanted when the pregnancies were discovered.

This is not something new. It happens all the time. The only difference is this man has a damn good case to prove her an unfit mother over the method she used to get pregnant!

[Walt Starr]

150. UPDATE THIS MORNING: Woman says baby conceived in usual way

and that the man made up this tale in an attempt to get away from paying child support.

Read it in the chicago Tribune this morning. That puts a WHOLE OTHER spin on this thing and demonstrates the woman is a good paretn but the man is the lowest scum around.

[LisaL]

59. And you should read my post.

You are the one saying that he should have sued for custody instead of paying child support. What I am saying that he shouldn't sue for custody just to get out of child support because the child is a human being, and he shouldn't try to get a child he doesn't want out of spite.
Furthermore, the child support was obviously an issue at one time, because the woman went to court to get the man to pay it.

[Walt Starr]

70. TWO FUCKING YEARS AFTER THE FACT!!!!!!!

And never once during those two years did she attempt to contact him and let him know!

Clearly, she is unbalanced and he should be the one raising the child!

[LisaL]

79. How do you know he is balanced? LOL.

Furthermore, he obviously doesn't want to raise the child as he did not sue for custody.

[Walt Starr]

99. They're both irresponsible, IMO

Him for not seeing that she's unfit to raise his child and she for the way she went about getting that child.

You want to know what's even scarier. Both of them are LICENSED PHYSICIANS!

[ProudToBeLiberal]

101. Have you read the case? CHILD SUPPORT NOT AN ISSUE

sheesh

[Mr. Sinister]

49. Yeah but then he would have a child to raise.

Which from the sounds of it is something he didn't want from the very beginning. While the revenge aspect of it makes it tempting, there is a child involved. I don't know which would be worse. Being raised by a dad that didn't want you and was tricked into producing you in the
first place or the crazy mom who is capable of obtaining a child
this way (given the blow job/artificial insem. story is true).

[Walt Starr]

77. Many men end up wioth custody of children they didn't want in the first

place.

If I was in his position I would sue for custody. She's obviously unfit to parent a child basic upon her behavior.

[jmowreader]

53. Condoms wouldn't even prevent this from happening

A woman intent on oopsing her boyfriend could purchase a brand of condom without spermicidal lube, have him wear one of the condoms during sex, then take the condom off and keep it to later squeeze out the semen and inseminate herself with it. IIRC semen lives about eight hours, so she'd have the time to do it.

I doubt Dr. Irons used a turkey baster--if she's a medical doctor, which is probable because the press usually doesn't call a non-medical doctorate holder "doctor," she's got access to the equipment you need to do this right.

Guys, start washing those rubbers out before you throw them away.

[phrenzy]

58. Flush The Condoms?

Ugh - of course, every place I've ever looked says "DO NOT flush condoms down the toilet"

Oh well, better re-think that one.

One of those (few) things that makes me glad I don't have casual sex.

[jmowreader]

67. Not flush. Rinse out.

Turn the condom inside out, wash off the semen under running water, and throw the condom in the trash.

Condoms will clog-up a sewage treatment plant.

[MrSlayer]

56. If true it's completely unfair.

And I don't think he should have to pay a dime. What a terrible thing to do to somebody.

[pelagius]

68. I'm a bit taken aback...

...at the misogyny _and_ misandry in this topic.

[Bouncy Ball]

69. Wow, I feel for that guy.

I mean, they weren't even having intercourse, so he had every right to think THAT particular act (the oral) wouldn't result in pregnancy. Under every other circumstance (except the woman scheming to "keep" the semen), it wouldn't.

I have to wonder how fast she had to get him out of there and go grab the turkey baster. I mean those guys don't last forever. Or did she store them in the fridge for a while?

Completely and totally deceptive. If you are going to do something like that you do NOT turn around and sue for child support. He didn't even KNOW about it.

[Mr. Sinister]

81. What if cloning technology was perfected?

And a child could be created from my blood, hair or dander? Would I still be liable? Would I have to travel in a little plastic suit just to be safe. It's a little far-fetched but as a thought experiment it does show some of the dangers in the "spill your seed, pay for your deed" line of reasoning.

[Tansy_Gold]

105. No, Mr. Sinister, you would not be held liable if your

DNA were stolen from you without your knowledge and/or consent.

In this case, the donor voluntarily gave his DNA to the donee.

Big difference.

See
http://www.divorcesource.com/research/dl/paternity/99jan1.shtml
for an excellent analysis of various "involuntary insemination" cases, including one almost identical to the one under discussion here.


Re sperm banks. Although laws differ from state to state and haven't always kept up with the technology, in general the donor donates the sperm voluntarily into the keeping of a third party with the legal agreement that the donor will not be held liable for any pregnancy resulting from fertilization with said sperm. The donee gets the donation but only on the condition that she understands she has no legal recourse to the donor for child support. And the third party provides a screen of anonymity between the donor and donee.

Again: If all someone wants is mindless, casual sex with people they don't care about, well, why should I have sympathy for them? They're heartless to begin with. Would I want to sleep with someone like that? Hell, no.

but when a guy starts spreading his little seeds around, he needs to understand that he takes the risk of child support; the woman takes the risk of pregnancy. Even steven.

(Personally, since he gets off with just coughing up some cash every month, I think he's getting off easy. No dirty diapers, no interrupted sleep, no work days lost to take care of a kid puking and shitting with flu. . . . . . . and of course no worries that the kid will end up being conscripted for a boooooosh war and the notification team will show up at the door some bright sunny afternoon.)

[Mr. Sinister]

116. Thanks I guess I completely understand.

There are probably some legalistic loose ends like what if its in a condom and thrown away but I'll take my questions as answered. I don't quite share your strong feelings of contempt for people who don't engage
in sex only in loving relationships. Not all casual sex is mindless or heartless -- but I guess it is if you feel that way. Thank you again for your thoughtful response.

[Tansy_Gold]

117. Casual sex

Mr. Sinister and everyone else --

I have nothing against sex or sexual pleasure or even casual sex -- between consenting adults, of course.

What bugs the living shit out of me, however, is this constant harping about people who don't EVER want to have any consequences. They want absolute guarantees that nothing is going to happen, or if it does, that they won't be held responsible.

Everything we do in life has risks. Every time we get in our car, we run the risk of blowing a tire on the freeway and rolling four times into the median, or having a gasoline tanker truck truck explode in front of us, or whatever. Most of us know enough not to get behind the wheel when we're stinking drunk, and if we do and we have an accident or get stopped by the cops, we accept the consequences.

But for some reason or other, there's still this mentality that men should be able to have recreational sex and be absolutely, totally, completely absolved of any responsibility for the consequences of their actions because, hey, they didn't intend for anyone to get pregnant.

It happens. It happens because the condom breaks, because the pills didn't work, because the diaphragm slips, because she lied, because he lied, because they changed their minds, because whatever. And none of that changes the fact that unless you've had yourself sterilized, every time you have heterosexual sex, there's a chance the woman can get pregnant.

So all I'm saying is that anyone -- particularly the men who are usually the ones who end up as the non-custodial, support-paying parent -- anyone who absolutely does not want the responsibility for a child either ought not have sex or get themselves "fixed." And if you just want to have sex with someone who you would absolutely positively never want to have a child with or spend any "quality" time with, why not just masturbate? Because that's all it's really about, isn't it, just getting your rocks off with any willing body?

Otherwise, just take some responsibility. That's all. And don't whine when something goes wrong.

The guy had consensual sex with her, apparently more than once over the period of a four-month relationship, and now he's going to pay for it. Oh, well. He ought to be an adult about it, say "Okay, look, we had sex and we both knew this could happen. I feel betrayed and deceived that you felt you had to go to this extreme to get pregnant and then demand child support, but I could have avoided the risk by not having sex with you. I took that risk and I'm willing to take the responsibility, too."

[Mr. Sinister]

122. Well of course what you want and what you get are very different

I think it's okay to not actually desire the consequences but yes it's foolish to not understand what the consequences are and be prepared and adult about them when they occur. As I don't sleep with women myself, I was unaware that straight men had to entertain the possibility of pregnancy when engaged in specifically non-procreative activities. The closest correlative I could image for myself is if I got an STD from mutual masturbation. I would be very surprised but I would like to hope I wouldn't whine. And I certainly wouldn't do so in a public forum where I am not guaranteed a sympathetic ear. We are not all monsters of selfishness (as I know you know) but yes sometimes men are very thoughtless. I believe I've heard rumors that women can very occasionally be too. :-)

[uhhuh]

130. I see

"but when a guy starts spreading his little seeds around, he needs to understand that he takes the risk of child support; the woman takes the risk of pregnancy. Even steven.

(Personally, since he gets off with just coughing up some cash every month, I think he's getting off easy. No dirty diapers, no interrupted sleep, no work days lost to take care of a kid puking and shitting with flu. . . . . . . and of course no worries that the kid will end up being conscripted for a boooooosh war and the notification team will show up at the door some bright sunny afternoon.)"

Those things you describe the woman having to deal with could be avoided by having an abortion. This guy has no recourse over his reproductive freedom. He can't make her abort, nor should he be able to, but he took what most people would deem reasonable precautions to rule out pregnancy as a consequence.

The thing I find distressing about your position here is the overwhelming sense of satisfaction over how this guy, who had no reason to suspect that his actions would lead to the consequences they did should just have to deal with it.

You seem smug about it. You seem to take the position that since society has been unfair to women for a long time, that it is just great that a man is being forced to endure some unfairness.

I don't think you honestly believe that what was done in this case, if true, is justice. I think you are just gloating that a man got his this time.

Would it be fair to charge me as an accomplice if I gave someone a kitchen knife set as a gift for their birthday, and they used it later to kill someone?

I don't think so.

[Tansy_Gold]

141. No, you're quite wrong about what I think and believe

For one thing, there's been no concrete determination as to whether or not the oral-sex-and-turkey-baster method was used or if they did in fact have "regular" intercourse.

If Dr. Irons did the oral-sex-and-turkey-baster scene, then I think she's pathetic and desperate and pretty twisted. And Dr. Phillips should have noticed that.

regardless, however, these two people engaged in consensual activities that resulted in ejaculation. There's no mention of condoms or birth control pills. She was married to someone else at the time. This is risky behavior, and two M.D.s ought to realize that.

I just want to see people take responsibility for the consequences of their voluntary actions.

And I'm not going to get into the "well, she could have had an abortion" discussion. Been there, done that.

I'm going to bed and hoping this thread will have died by tomorrow.

[uhhuh]

143. Good night to you

I will reply anyway

"For one thing, there's been no concrete determination as to whether or not the oral-sex-and-turkey-baster method was used or if they did in fact have "regular" intercourse."

Agreed. That's why I said,"if true" in my post.

"If Dr. Irons did the oral-sex-and-turkey-baster scene, then I think she's pathetic and desperate and pretty twisted. And Dr. Phillips should have noticed that."

Maybe she seemed normal. Maybe she was a little strange. I know a lot of people that are a little strange. I don't think I should have to think of every possible crazy thing they might do before getting close to them.

"regardless, however, these two people engaged in consensual activities that resulted in ejaculation. There's no mention of condoms or birth control pills. She was married to someone else at the time. This is risky behavior, and two M.D.s ought to realize that."

As M.D.s, I'm sure they would be that there has NEVER been a case of pregancy with oral sex as the cause without some other means of transmitting sperm to her reproductive organs. I don't think he was irresponsible if, and I repeat, if what is alleged is true.

"I just want to see people take responsibility for the consequences of their voluntary actions."

That is a good idea. I don't see how he was not taking responsibility if what he claims is true. I pointed out in my last post a hypothetical that you seemed to have ignored. Oh well..


"And I'm not going to get into the "well, she could have had an abortion" discussion. Been there, done that."

I must have missed it, so I remain unable to see how your posting about all the things she would have to endure, while he's just out a few bucks, makes any sense.

I think that it relates directly to the idea that ALL people should have a right to determine if and when they reproduce. I don't think that a woman should be forced to bear a child, and I don't think that a man, who has made every effort, and has every reason to believe that the sexual act he is engaged in has a ZERO chance of impregnating someone without outside intervention should be accused of irresponsibility.

"I'm going to bed and hoping this thread will have died by tomorrow."



Don't worry. It probably will. Sleep well.


On edit: I didn't mean to attribute to you any attitudes that you do not hold. I gave my impression of what I felt was your attitude based on how I interpreted your postings. I apologize if I was mistaken. It seemed to me like you were being somewhat smug. If that is not the case I am sorry.

[dsc]

148. actually you have mistated this principle several times in this thread

Things which you cast off or throw out (such as dander, hair, or tissue with sperm) are no longer considered your property and thus can be taken by anyone at anytime. That is why police can search your garbage at curbside. The fact is what she did here is legally no different from taking a disposed of tissue and harvesting the sperm.

[MADem]

165. In this case, the donor voluntarily gave his DNA to the donee....?

The question is, though, for what purpose, either stated or implied?

If I loan someone my car to go to the 7-11, and they use it without my knowledge or consent as a getaway car in a bank heist, am I responsible?

That Chicago Tribune link is expired, so I couldn't see "the other side of the story." He says their relationship consisted of three BJs, and she lied to him about being divorced, so he stopped the relationship. Now she says they did the deed?

Perhaps the kid would be better off with Child Protective Services. Sometimes "natural parents" can be pretty unnatural. What a great thing for a kid to read growing up--conceived during a BJ, mother was cheating on her husband, didn't tell the biological father for two years until suing for child support...wow, talk about a "low self esteem" trifecta.

This whole case is one of those oddball ones on the edge, that end up defining the rules for everyone else. It's rather creepy.

[Horse with no Name]

92. Oh my

Say you are in a hotel--have protected sex and leave the used condom in the trash. Is this going to be consider child abandonment in the future?
What happens when the hotel maid sees you drive off in an expensive car and takes your sperm and impregnates herself then sues you for paternity?
The man had a blow job. Blow jobs are consensual acts (if not--she should have filed charges long ago)and do NOT cause pregnancy. He did not have intercourse with her, possibly because he didn't want the burden of impregnating her.
If the woman wanted a child, fine, take the sperm and go--raise the child yourself. But the sperm was not left in a procreative manner, so therefore he should be not held accountable for what she did with it after he walked out the front door without his knowlege.
I would hope that this man had enough dignity to support this child--but I truly do not believe that under any circumstance he should forcibly be held responsible.
Just IMHO.

[Name removed]

98. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[VirginiaDem]

100. Yet another American cultural invention...

Nathaniel Hawthorne feminists. Paraphrased Monty Python might do well here: "Every sperm is evil. Every sperm is dangerous. If a sperm gets set loose, it belongs to us."

[Pithlet]

107. Yep

Cause this kind of thing happens all the time. Women, particularly feminists, are just sperm stealing crazies. Men, watch your backs!

Jesus, people. This is one crazy woman! Let's not extrapolate a whole societal and cultural judgment based on this case.

[lazarus]

138. Well

we do have people upthread who claim that this sort of thing happens in reverse all the time.

And that any time a man ejaculates, he should expect that it could lead to pregnancy, especially if a woman is in the vicinity.

Frustrating statements from all sides, don't you think?

[DoNotRefill]

126. All your sperm...

are belong to us!!!!


/sorry, couldn't resist!

[ProudToBeLiberal]

103. This woman should get her doctorate revoked

I hope the man sues her silly. Man we have some sick and twisted people in this country.

[Digit]

109. Learn to keep in in your pants or put a raincoat on it.

You have to be responsible for what your body can reproduce.
Same as if a rubber broke.
Women...same to you...you have to take responsibility.

[arikara]

111. Did anyone READ the story?

Paragraph 2...

Dr. Richard O. Phillips accuses Dr. Sharon Irons of a "calculated, profound personal betrayal" six years ago, but she says they had the baby through sexual intercourse.

I think he sounds like a repuke nut case to come up with such a stupid defense for not paying child support.

[lazarus]

139. She needs to develop some consistency, then

If that's her claim, why would she also "assert that when plaintiff 'delivered' his sperm, it was a gift," the decision said. "There was no agreement that the original deposit would be returned upon request.""

[HuckleB]

174. Where's the inconsistency?

Sorry, I don't see any.

[lazarus]

188. really?

She says sexual intercourse got her pregnant. then she says he gave her the sperm as a gift through oral sex. Which is it?

[The Animator]

114. If I may interject with a comparable story.

I have a friend who was once in a long term relationship with a live-in girlfriend. They had been living together, and faithful to each other, all the while having consensual sex. From the very beginning of their sexual relationship, it was understood that she was on "the pill" thereby eliminating the possibility of pregnancy. About two years into it she gets pregnant. She had stopped taking the pill and didn't let him know that she had stopped taking it.

That was an instant red flag for me! That's information that you need!
I could understand if she forgot to take it, but no, she made a conscious decision to stop, and made no attempt to tell him. When she got pregnant he was still under the impression that she was still taking it. If he had known she was no longer on it, he would have used a condom.

Despite the seriously questionable circumstances he supported her throughout the pregnancy. His family held a big shower for them, and everyone gave a little to help this young, and thoroughly unprepared couple with their fledgling family.

She left him about a month and a half after the baby was born, she took the baby, along with everything his family had given them both.

That's ripping a man to shred's. I've seen it, and it ain't pretty. I had to help him pick up the peices.

What that cunt did was wrong.

I don't use the C word lightly. I would not describe any other person in that way, but she earned it in my eyes.

So there you have it, from this man's perspective.

A story of deciet, extortion, and betrayal. Take from this what you will.

[HuckleB]

182. The pill is not foolproof in itself.

Neither are condoms. You are always taking a chance. And it's the responsible thing to understand that going in.

[PowerToThePeople]

140. Child support, my ass

He should not have to pay a dime of child support. It was artificial insemination, just as if she went to a sperm bank. It was not an "oops" which they both could be held responsible for. This pisses me off extremely...

[dsc]

149. It is sad how few posts here were about the child

That is the true victim in this mess. Assuming it is true that she saved this man's sperm, why did she do it? Given her status as a doctor it was unlikely money. The other reasons for wanting a child from this particular man make my blood run cold. I very much fear for this child who is likely to be viewed by her as the object of a love hate compulsion of some sort. Frankly this child should be placed for adoption with both of these parents paying support.

[histohoney]

158. Yeah

Some one saw the child. Thanks.

[Walt Starr]

157. THIS ARTICLE DID NOT GIVE THE ENTIRE STORY

Read this one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1265150

[Megahurtz]

161. Well, then if this is true

then it's a different story.

But what I want to know is, why did she just go ahead and have a kid from a one night stand?:wtf:

I don't get women like this. Was it because she knew with his income she would get an extra $800.00 a month?

I'm sorry but $800.00 is a lot. The regular minimum child support is around $225.00 a month.

And who the fuck would want to have a child alone? Looks to me she had a child for her own selfish reasons without even considering the child.

Still seems deviously kooky :evilgrin: :freak: to me.

I can understand him owing child support, but then again I can understand him wanting to get out of it under the circumstances. And you know those attorneys will try all kinds of tactics to get their clients out of something.

[bloom]

175. According to this article

according to "her" - it was a 4 month relationship...

"The relationship ended, the suit said, when Phillips learned Irons had lied to him about being recently divorced and was still married to another doctor.

Irons, who practices internal medicine in suburban Olympia Fields, said in a telephone interview Thursday that Phillips knew she was still married during their affair, and also knew she was pregnant with his child.

"He was very supportive and very happy about it," she said. "He said, `You need to hurry up and get your divorce.'"

He promised to marry her and asked her to quit her job, she said, but several days before her last day at work, Phillips informed her that he "couldn't go through with it."

-------------------------------

Child Support payments are based on income - hers and his. If the mom and dad both made minimum wage -the payments might be more like $140/month. The dad (as well as the mom) obviously makes a lot more than that.

RE: And who the fuck would want to have a child alone?

Who knows - maybe she loved him... maybe she doesn't believe in abortion... :shrug:

[Kadie]

166. Thanks for posting this.

I found this entire thing interesting, in the fact that the sperm "were hers to keep" and therefore to do with what she wanted I guess. And as you and others stated above, this isn't about child support. I find it interesting that the court also ruled he could press his claim for emotional distress. I also find it hard to believe that the child was not conceived the "normal" way.

He said, she said.

[HuckleB]

171. I'm incredibly confused...

at how so many people here could simply assume that this guy wasn't trying to pull a fast one. Come on. He's in a "nightmare"? Give me a break. That ought to have been a clue that this guy ain't no innocent bystander.