Deceptive conception alleged by dad's suit

[Walt Starr]

NOTE TO MODS: THIS IS A NEW STORY WITH IMPORTANT NEW INFORMATION PUBLISHED TODAY

Deceptive conception alleged by dad's suit
Plaintiff says woman saved his semen

By Karen Mellen
Tribune staff reporter
Published February 25, 2005


Test-tube babies and powerful fertility drugs have changed the notion that there is a usual way to usher a child into the world.

But a Chicago doctor says his one-time lover--using deception and a low-tech method--conceived their child in a most unusual way.

In a lawsuit reinstated this week by the Illinois Appellate Court, Dr. Richard Phillips says his former girlfriend, Dr. Sharon Irons, secretly collected sperm from him, then inseminated herself.

He has sued Irons for intentional infliction of emotional distress, saying she impregnated herself with "Dr. Phillips' deceptively acquired semen," according to the lawsuit.

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.

<snip>

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0502250262feb25,1,6709669.story?coll=chi-newslocal-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true

If the man's story is concocted, he's scummier than scum. Based upon the fact that this is now "he-said-she-said", the claim that the baby was conceived in the normal manner must be given a higher credibility level than the man's claim.

[havocmom]

1. So, if she collected his semen, wouldn't he have had to cooperate to some

degree? He may not have liked the way she used it, but... I'm confused. (and I don't want to register for the Chicago paper)

[Walt Starr]

2. If she had collected his semen, he is still responsible for child support

but that would mean she is also scummier than scum.

Right now, I believe her story (what's more likely, the baby was conceived with normal intercourse or she saved his semen from a blowjob?) and cannot consider her anything other than a normal human being trying to do the right thing for her daughter.

[HockeyMom]

3. Skeptic

Don't mean to be gross here, but just skeptical and curious. First, of all don't sperm only live a short time, in an ideal "surrounding"? Would not saliva be a hostile "environment"?

[Walt Starr]

4. Yup, it's still possible

but the probability of her story being more accurate than his is astronimcally high.

[ProfessorGAC]

6. I Think We're Agreeing With You Walt

The Professor

[Walt Starr]

9. I know, I was agreeing back

:evilgrin:

[ProfessorGAC]

13. Cool!

I misunderstood your prior post. I went back and read it and now i know what i misread! Knowing you were agreeing back really changed how i read it. My fault.
The Professor

[ProfessorGAC]

5. Wouldn't That Be Obvious, Too?

It's not like living tissue can be stored in septic conditions without the exactly right temperatures and conditions, right?

If she was storing in vials, and immediately running to a cryofreezer, it seems that the collection and storage initiative would be extremely obvious.

His story seems hard to accept.
The Professor

[ldf]

31. if he is lying

he IS scum, and i take back everything i said on the other thread.

but to address your point, he is ABSOLUTELY NOT responsible if she "collected" his semen.

if the semen goes into the vagina, THEN you got a case of him being responsible. if it doesn't, the man has NO RESPONSIBILITY, ABSOLUTELY NONE.

it may be semantics and technicalities, but if he didn't come in her, he is not responsible.

and in THAT case, she is the scum. period. and i would be damned if she ever got a penny out of me, for her OR the child. the child would NOT be my responsibility. (of course, noting my avatar, THAT is never going to be a possiblity.) :-)

[Mandate My Ass]

7. The plot thickens

Like you said, one of them is total scum, but the burden of proof is on the man and his claim is going to be very tough to prove.

A few of his claims don't add up to me. He knew her for ten years before they had sex and he didn't know she was married? C'mon.

The "oral sex only" claim also seems like a bit of a stretch. It would be tricky, to say the least, to save his semen under less than ideal circumstances and still conceive from it. OTOH, why did she wait so long to pursue paternity and child support?

In any event, this is going to get uglier than it already is.

[Walt Starr]

8. Teh "Two Year" thing is how long before she got judgement on support

"Irons, 40, who lives in Olympia Fields with her 5-year-old daughter, said Thursday that Phillips was happy when he learned she was pregnant during their relationship, which began after she separated from her husband"

He knew she was pregnant. This was all some ruse concocted to get out of supporting the child he conceived with her knowingly. This bastard is an SOB who should be paying triple the $800 because he's a physician who can afford to support HIS child.

[Tansy_Gold]

11. Um, not to be personal, but is this the same Walt Starr

who was screaming last night that Dr. Phillips ought to sue for custody to get out of paying support for a child he never wanted?

Or did I read you wrong in the other thread?


:evilgrin:

[Walt Starr]

12. That was before her side of the story was revealed

I fell for the media bait and switch of showing one side of the story. Basically, all that was presented yesterday was a lie.

[bloom]

14. It sounds to me like the "emotional stress"

lawsuit was an expensive (rich man's) version of a control - freak trying to nullify his responsibilities.

[Walt Starr]

16. BINGO!

No matter what. No matter how the child was concieved. Courts have consistantly held that child support is about the child. He is responsible for child support.

This is a bogus attempt to get out of that responsibility and the media played a game yesterday by not giving the whole story.

[H3Dakota]

10. Skeptical here as well...

Sorry, but I have a tough time buying that they were in a relationship for months and only ever had engaged in oral sex 3 times! I don't believe that. If they were in a relationship that led to having oral sex, then it would have lead to more.

Combine that with the short life span of sperm - especially when it was recovered from her mouth? And, as anyone who has been through multiple tries knows, artifical insemination is pretty darn sketchy at best, anyway. I sure hope one of them can back up their side of the story so that it can be resolved.

In the end, it doesn't really matter all that much how she was conceived - what the father is doing can only harm that child & it seems like he doesn't care about THAT fact one iota. I can't imagine if one of my parents sued the other claiming "severe emotional distress" and that he/she was "trapped in a terrible nightmare". What a horrible thing to do to a child.

[uppityperson]

15. Does this mean that once the sperm leaves his body he's not responsible

It doesn't really matter to me about these people except does this mean that he's not responsible for his sperm once they leave his body? If you use a contraceptive that fails, is he still responsible for the offspring? So if it oral sex, it doesn't count (hey Bill Clinton, remember that)? On the other hand, if you donate sperm to a sperm bank (night deposits accepted), I imagine you get to sign a thing saying you're no longer responsible for them.

Only reason to care is the whole sperm/egg/fetus ownership/etc stuff.

[bleedingheart]

17. I don't believe for a minute he never had old fashioned sex with her

sorry but I think it is sour grapes over his having to pay for his child. The lesson should be, don't sleep with people you wouldn't want to have kids with unless you are willing to pay the consequences.

[HuckleB]

18. Hmm.

Why do I suspect that this won't be the last time we hear of some slacker trying to use this ridiculous story to get out of taking care of his child? All I know is that I would be finding another physician fast, if I was one of Phillips' patients.

[GaYellowDawg]

19. How weird.

Just a few comments:

1. This whole scenario sounds pretty crazy to me. It sounds to me as if he's just trying to get away from his responsibility. Frankly, she wouldn't have had to do this whole homemade artificial insemination thing at all if she wanted a kid without his consent. I speak to many men not being careful enough; all she had to do was to say, "I'm on the pill" and many men would drop the condom in a heartbeat. Mission accomplished. I don't believe him.

2. Whatever happens, the kid involved didn't deserve this.

3. The original story was typical of the shameful excuse we have for a media nowadays; by not telling that she was claiming normal intercourse occurred, the newspaper was indulging in sheer sensationalism at the cost of accuracy and/or fairness. Perhaps they should have just called the man the Swift Sperm Doctor for Truth while they were at it.

4. Let's say it actually went down the way the guy said it did. Note: I don't think it did and I think the guy should have to pay his child support. What about the child's welfare? I looked up Olympia Fields, where the female doctor lives, and it's one of those posh application-only communities. She's not hurting for money at all, so frankly, the $800 a month would be punitive, not a financial need.

As to the position that since he ejeculated, he's automatically responsible... I don't agree. With sexual intercourse, there are no 100% guaranteed conception options, and there is a chance of pregnancy. Therefore, I believe that any man engaging in sexual intercourse is liable for child support, period.

I think oral sex is a different matter. A woman cannot get pregnant from having a penis in her mouth. I believe that this removes liability from the man, and I would deny the woman child child support.

Again, let me emphasize that I think he's lying.

5. Who does or does not take pleasure from the act is entirely irrelevant. Do you think fellatio is distasteful? Then say no, and if the guy gets mad, tell him to go to hell. Hey, I love oral sex, but I'd far rather do without than to press it on anyone in any fashion. Personally, I would NEVER want to have any physical act of any kind with a woman - touching, kissing, any kind of sex - unless she wanted to do be a full, enthusiastic participant. No touching without the knowledge that your partner wants you to. Every single person should be held strictly to that standard.

[Walt Starr]

20. Your thoughts on the subject do not enter into the equation under the law

Under the law, child support is about one thing and one thing only, THE CHILD. The only consideration is the child. The man is the biological father. No other man has presented himself to be an adoptive father. Under the law, there is only a single answer, child support is in order.

"Feelings" about how the pregnancy came to be cannot and will not enter into the equation.

This man is scummier than scum and deserves everything he has coming to him.

[GaYellowDawg]

23. Fine.

Under the law, child support is about one thing and one thing only, THE CHILD. The only consideration is the child. The man is the biological father. No other man has presented himself to be an adoptive father. Under the law, there is only a single answer, child support is in order.

I never claimed to be an expert on the subject, and it looks as if he's been paying child support.

"Feelings" about how the pregnancy came to be cannot and will not enter into the equation.

Please don't be condescending. "Feelings" of injustice can very well lead to new precedents, or laws being changed, so "cannot" and "will not" are entirely inappropriate.

This man is scummier than scum and deserves everything he has coming to him.

I'd like to remind you of a couple of quotes from my post:

I don't believe him.

Let's say it actually went down the way the guy said it did. Note: I don't think it did and I think the guy should have to pay his child support. (bold italics in original post)

Yes, this guy should get nailed. You and I are in agreement on that.

Frankly, though, if someone pulled her own artificial insemination without the man's consent as he claimed,

which I agree with you that he's lying about,

she damn well ought to shoulder the burden of raising the child. My opinion comes with a caveat: there should be indisputable proof that she's done so. And I mean proof as in caught-with-the-turkey-baster-on-tape proof. I am all in favor of women determining their reproductive rights, but no one will ever convince me that a woman has the right to use her reproductive system as a weapon against me. Please take note: I think that this would be an extraordinarily rare occurrence and that it's an entirely appropriate assumption that any given woman WOULD NOT do this.

Now, that's my opinion, and if it's contrary to the law, I still have a right to express it. Perhaps you didn't mean to imply that my opinion is irrelevant because it disagrees with the law. If you did, aside from the condescension, it seems a very conservative attitude to me.

[Tansy_Gold]

27. Legal precedents

Similar cases have been tried before, and the man is always held liable for child support.

As long as the act was voluntary -- and it doesn't make any difference what kind of act it was: penile-vaginal intercourse, oral intercourse, anal intercourse, mutual masturbation, anything -- if it results in pregnancy, he's liable for child support.

This is not MY OPINION -- this is the case law. It's easily obtainable on the internet even without Lexis-Nexis.

(Sperm bank donations are usually the exception, because the third party acts as a screen of anonymity between the donor and donee, and the donee accepts financial responsibility.)

The court in this case, as in so many others before it, has decided that the biological father willingly, voluntarily, knowingly, and consensually engaged in a sex act with this woman that resulted ultimately in her pregnancy. He therefore owes a duty of support to the child.

It doesn't matter that he engaged in a sex act not normally conducive to fertilization. Wearing a condom (or two) doesn't guarantee contraception, neither does being on the pill or using a diaphragm or anything else. The "oral" contraception in the Phillips-Irons case "failed," and Phillips is liable.

whether he's pissed at her or just pissed at having to pay, I have no way of knowing. What he's suing for is "mental anguish" at her betrayal, NOT for lessening of the support, because he can't get out of that. so he's doing it in a back-door fashion and I think he's a louse regardless: He committed a sexual act with her and it led to her pregnancy, and he should be a "man" about it and take his responsibility seriously and without incessant whining.

As some would say, what a pussy.

[GaYellowDawg]

30. Oh, I wasn't arguing the legal point of this case.

I just was saying that if a verdict in any given case seems ridiculous enough, the law can be changed because of public outcry.

You know, this is just another reminder for me to be very careful about what I do with whom. My personal standard is that sex isn't going to happen unless I want to bring a ring along with it. It makes for a lot of frustration, but then again, I'll never see my name in a headline like this one. This stance is admittedly helped by the fact that no one's exactly busting the door down to conquer me.
:nopity:

He committed a sexual act with her and it led to her pregnancy, and he should be a "man" about it and take his responsibility seriously and without incessant whining.
As some would say, what a pussy.

Wow! Actually, I wouldn't... I tend to put that word along with a certain "c" word right up there with the "n" word or "f*g" in terms of offensiveness to a particular group of people and REALLY try not to use it.

After reading the second article, I think the guy's lying, and I completely agree with you that he's a louse. I'm also completely disgusted with the media in how they've handled this; as I said in a prior post, they sacrificed integrity for sensationalism in the first article.

I'd also like to say that I read most of the other thread, and I know that you've got a strongly held opinion on this. I appreciate your courtesy in expressing that opinion in a nonconfrontational fashion! Hopefully, whenever I come across something that I feel as strongly about, I can follow your example. Isn't civilized discourse great?

To courtesy!!
:toast:

[bloom]

21. RE: She's not hurting

"She's not hurting for money at all, so frankly, the $800 a month would be punitive, not a financial need. "

That isn't the point. There are tables and charts that take into account the mother's income, the father's income and assessments are made in relation to what is a reasonable amount for each person to contribute.

It's not like someone is being "fined" for being a parent. Although that does seem to be how some people see it.

[GaYellowDawg]

22. OK.

There are tables and charts that take into account the mother's income, the father's income and assessments are made in relation to what is a reasonable amount for each person to contribute.

Fair enough. Frankly, I've got no idea how this works because no one in my immediate family's ever had child support issues.

[TheWraith]

24. We'll see.

Given the shifting stories here, I'm reluctant to treat anything as 'fact'. We may find out tomorrow that the woman did admit to doing it, then changed her story, or that the guy has a history of self-medicating. Who knows.

[LizW]

25. Who didn't see this coming?

Yesterday, some were calling this woman a sicko and a lowlife scum, but it seemed obvious that there had to be two sides to the story for it to get this far in the courts.

Some seemed to assume that it is possible for a woman to hold semen in her mouth, spit it out and somehow successfully artificially inseminate herself with it without the man who just ejaculated it knowing. I won't say it's not possible, but it certainly seems unlikely. If this sort of bizarre conception were possible, wouldn't we have heard of it happening before?

What we HAVE heard of happening before is a man saying, "It's not my kid; I never had intercourse with her." Then the paternity test comes back.

It seems likely to me is that the man is fighting to the bitter end to keep from paying child support for a kid he didn't want. He's obviously got the money to go to new and creative lengths.

Who wants to guess how long it will be before this story shows up as a plot on "Law and Order"?

[HuckleB]

26. I'm quite confused by that thread myself.

It just seems a bit bizarre to assume that this guy was offering a full rendering of reality. I mean what he's offering is an awfully big chunk to chew. (No pun intended.)

[dsc]

28. Among the reasons this was given some credence

was the fact her defense was reported to have been that the sperm was a gift not that the incident hadn't occured.

[Tansy_Gold]

29. The definition of "gift" is, IIRC, a legal one, not a vernacular one

It has to do with the difference between a "gift" and, say, a "loan."

In the original SF Chronicle article, someone was quoted as saying something along the lines of there not being any intention of her giving the sperm back when she was through with it, hence, a permanent transfer of "ownership." And since it was voluntary on his part, it wasn't theft.

I'm not a lawyer and i don't play one on tv. I just get interested in this stuff.

[LizW]

32. Isn't it interesting that

that part of her defense was reported in the article, and not the part that alleged he had intercourse with her?

If I were the judge in this case, that would have been my first question once it was determined that this man was the father of the child. "Lady, HOW did you get pregnant?"

If it turns out that I'm wrong and this oral sex/non-swallowing/artificial insemination/pregnancy IS possible, then I'll be more prone to believe the guy's story. But I have BIG doubts.