Child Support For Oral Sex

[Dr. Shane]

Now do you think this guy should have to pay child support because he had oral sex?

Man Can Sue Over Surprise Pregnancy

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

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.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

[Nicodema]

I didn't think this was even possible. LOL.

[Amelia]

well thats one for the books. Im curious as to how she kept it viable during all the transfers it had to go through. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon_smile_sick.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon_smile_sick.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon_smile_sick.gif" alt="" />

[cricket]

Absolutely. It's his kid.

[David_McQueen]

Quote:

---

"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. "There was no agreement that the original deposit would be returned upon request."

---

...Mind you if you are going to have an affair then you have to live with the consequences.

Now where did I put my flak jacket?

[Bravus]

I disagree that it's his child and he should have to pay child support. If they'd had intercourse and she had got pregnant, OK, but IMO she acted to deliberately deceive him and deprive him of a choice. Surely consequences apply to our choices - no choice, no consequences. Sure, he made a bad choice to have an affair, and apparently a worse choice of partner, but I can't see any construction of the events under which he chose to have a child - or, as far as he was concerned, even to risk the chance of having one.

[Dr. Shane]

Well Brother Bravus, he made the decision to unzip his zipper and leave his "deposit" with someone that he wasn't married to, didn't he? And don't tell me he didn't enjoy it as much as he would have intercourse.

I have a hard time understanding men that go messing around with live sperm swimming in the semen. It just goes to show you don't know what is going to happen with that semen once you leave it behind. At least he didn't get framed for a rape and go to prison.

Moral of the story is to keep you zipper closed unless you are with your wife.

[cricket]

When I wrote, absolutely, it's his kid. I meant, it is absolutely his kid. Bravus, whether the man wanted it or not is irrelevant. It is his kid. The question shouldn't really be, should he HAVE to pay child support. It should be, CAN he pay child support. I mean, after all, wouldn't he want to? It is his kid.

[TIC]I'm certain that a reasonable man who is reasonably not concerned that someone would take his sperm and deposit it somewhere that he did not intend would reasonably want to take care of his own offspring--initially desired or not.[/TIC]

[Neil D]

So let me ask this question...

A man gives sperm to a sperm bank. He gives it for scientific use. The sperm is used to concieve a child.

Should the man be required to pay child support for that child?

Am I hearing that, "yes, he should pay child support."?

[Dr. Shane]

I thought of that too, Brother Neil. And the big differance is legal consent. When a man gives sperm to a sperm bank he is normally paid for the sperm and the sperm becomes property of the sperm bank and they are responsible of anyone that gets pregnant with it.

Some may say, well this man gave this female doctor his sperm in the same manner so she should be held responsible for getting herself pregnant with it. Well, that arguement may get some traction but the man failed to get anything in writing. There was no "meeting of the minds" like there is with a sperm bank.

I think Sister Christine may wonder why a man doesn't care about his offspring in the same way that a woman does. A man can give away his sperm much easier than a woman can her baby. It has to do with the pregnancy. The woman bonds with her baby during the nine months of pregnancy and the man doesn't. Most fathers do not feel an immediate emotional attachment to a child upon its birth like mothers do.

[cricket]

Neil, nope. What you're hearing is that he should want to pay child support. In fact, he should want to raise the child as his own (since it is) in the event that the couple (for the sake of argument, I'll assume it was a couple) who chose to have the child withdraw on their opportunity.

Shane, having just read your response, I'm going to admit to something here: I really don't know how a man would feel about his offspring. I only know what I've been told, and what I've read in the Bible and in other materials.

Does it not make sense that a man should want to raise his children? Does it not make sense that a man should want to love a child of God, and to be responsible for that child that God has put within the realm of his responsibility?

Perhaps women are uniquely different than men in this regard. Even so, my husband and I have had several opportunities to support children beyond the realm of our "legal" responsibilities, and we do not shirk at any chance we get to help children in need.

Shane, in reading many of your posts, I know that you are a man of compassion. I know that you would take on the responsibility for a child in need if the circumstances presented themselves to you. The avatar of you and your child shows a lot of love in your heart.

And so, Neil and Shane, what I'm saying is that while the legal system may not require such a man to pay child support, the love in the man's heart (as given by God) should draw him to want to support this child.

Does that make sense? If not, why not? Why should this "natural bonding" take place only between women and children? It seems to me that God--a male figure--loves His children dearly--even before birth. Why wouldn't it seem possible then, that He would give these same desires to fathers?

[Neil D]

[:"blue"] Neil, nope. What you're hearing is that he should want to pay child support. In fact, he should want to raise the child as his own (since it is) in the event that the couple (for the sake of argument, I'll assume it was a couple) who chose to have the child withdraw on their opportunity....[snip]

And so, Neil and Shane, what I'm saying is that while the legal system may not require such a man to pay child support, the love in the man's heart (as given by God) should draw him to want to support this child.

Does that make sense? If not, why not? Why should this "natural bonding" take place only between women and children? It seems to me that God--a male figure--loves His children dearly--even before birth. Why wouldn't it seem possible then, that He would give these same desires to fathers? [/]

Well, Christine, I am going to go out on a limb and say something that is gonna probably open a can of worms....

It is this-

Not all guys feel they need to take care of thier fathered children.

Having said that, I suppose now I had better explain where I am coming from and what I mean....Kinda helps in preventing unwanted emotions from surfacing and damaging conversations.

It occurs to me, that women feel for thier children in an immediate sense after the birth of the child. They have had nine months of feeling something down there and knowing that they have a child with some one they have loved [hopefully]. Nevertheless, there is a bond before birth and a bonding after birth with the child between mother and child.

Bonding for the man, comes after birth, and over time with continuted interaction with the child. It does not happen immediately after birth as there is no interacdtion between the father and the child diectly except thru the mother.

So, contrary to your wording, Christine, the father does not 'want to' do anything with the child with the exception that he has acknowledge that he is responsible for bringing a wanted child into this world.

The key phrase is "wanted [by the perspective father] child". Any man who is out for illicit sex does not want a child. Just mention that on a date, and most probable sexual encounters can be kissed goodbye.

Sex is appoached in a different way by each gender but dove tails together for a common purpose. But there is no 'natural bonding' for a father that happens at birth, with the exception of a previous thought out acceptance by the same... Show me a man who is excited about the birth of a child, and I will show you a man who has thought thru [for himself] the concept of fatherhood. Show me a man who you might concider heartless toward the newly birthed child, and I will show you a man who has not thought thru the concept of being a father or who has rejected that concept.

Does any of this make sense?

[cricket]

Nah. No open can of worms. I understand what you're saying. I think it's a shame that God doesn't place this feeling between a father and offspring as He does between the mother and her offspring.

A question though: do men not have a feeling of obligation or caretaking for anyone but themselves? This notion seems contrary to the whole idea of being head of the household.

[Dr. Shane]

In many societies (not just judeo-christian) part of being a man is being a bread-winner. A healthy machoism is the longing to be a provider for one's family. A healthy man feels more manly when he can pay the bills, get his children to the dentist, eye doctor, hair cuts, shoes, etc. One of the arguements against the welfare state is that it makes men feel less like men. So I would say that an emotionally healthy man wants to support his family and recieves great sastsfaction from doing so.

[cricket]

That's what I thought. And, so, doesn't it make sense then, that this man in question would want to care for his children? It is his opportunity to fulfill this machoistic self-expectations.

[Dr. Shane]

No, because being a child is more than biological for a man. As I stated earlier, it normally takes months for a man to bond with his child and that is when he is living in the same house with the child.

[cricket]

In that case, my faith in men has plummeted dramatically. I'm sorry to hear that men don't have an innate desire to help others, to be caregivers for others. It must be really difficult then, to adhere to God's standards--going against such a heartless nature.

[Neil D]

Quote:

---

Nah. No open can of worms. I understand what you're saying. I think it's a shame that God doesn't place this feeling between a father and offspring as He does between the mother and her offspring.

---

Well, uh, that's just the way it is, Christine...

Quote:

---

A question though: do men not have a feeling of obligation or caretaking for anyone but themselves? This notion seems contrary to the whole idea of being head of the household.

---

That they/we do. But they count the cost of time and effort. That is why a man who wants children will have thought thru the obligation of fatherhood.

However, we also have this inordinate desire to, as some women like to put it, 'spread thier seed about'... And some of you women have the concept that this is a pounding overriding thought in the back of our heads such that it is a wonder how we ever get anything done....I disagree with the intensity of that thouht, but I will admit that some of us guys sure do act like it is true. As I have said, guys count the cost to them thier actions. Remember the article that someone [Amelia] posted of a couple who had sex in the airport during a layover [no pun intended]. You can be sure the guy had weighted out that "possibly no one will notice" [i sure don't know what the girl was thinking as she usually brings sensiblity to _w h e r e_ sex is gonna be engaged.]

Anyway, when a man is having illecit sex , it isn't with the concept of having children. And in most men's minds, it isn't with the idea of giving semen to have children. But rather it is to have fun...And this father was duped......

What I want to know is why a woman would want to do such a thing in the first place? Knowing that this guy was a jerk, why would she want children from the same?

[Dr. Shane]

Sister Christine you just have to accept the fact that men are from mars and women are from venus. They are actually different.

[Nicodema]

Quote:

---

In that case, my faith in men has plummeted dramatically. I'm sorry to hear that men don't have an innate desire to help others, to be caregivers for others. It must be really difficult then, to adhere to God's standards--going against such a heartless nature.

---

Then leave the menfolk be and let your faith plummet in me instead. A crying baby provokes feelings of raw violence and sheer hostility in me; it does nothing to provoke warmth or compassion. Granted, I don't act on those feelings (other than occasionally losing my patience and saying "oh shut up already!" which a baby of course cannot understand) but my "natural" desires to be compassionate and caretaking mysteriously end where I feel too much imposition upon myself and too much neediness on the part of the other, or else where said other becomes "demanding" like the sole purpose of my existence is to cater to said other -- and I don't care how old they are, whether 3 months, 3 years, 13 or 30. It's not because I'm heartless; it's because I have human limitations and that's where they are. I have biological and chemical and physical responses to things that I don't get any choice over and one of them is the more I am clung to or needed, the less inclined I am to be helpful or caretaking, I just want to get away and be left alone.

[bevin]

Quote:

---

But there is no 'natural bonding' for a father that happens at birth, with the exception of a previous thought out acceptance by the same... Show me a man who is excited about the birth of a child, and I will show you a man who has thought thru [for himself] the concept of fatherhood. Show me a man who you might concider heartless toward the newly birthed child, and I will show you a man who has not thought thru the concept of being a father or who has rejected that concept.

---

Having helped deliver another couple's child - in the back of an ambulance - I would disagree with this sentiment.

There is a multi-day high that affects anyone involved in the birth. While it did not make me want to raise that child - because it clearly belonged to another couple and raising it was not my responsibility - I think there are a lot of men who would find this a bonding experience if they did have some preexisting relationship.

However, in the case here, where the man basically was turned into a sperm-donor - I can see having only limited problems in suppressing the bonding.

Of course, if he is forced to pay child-support, he also gets all the privileges of being a dad - i.e. visitation rights etc.

The question I ask myself is "what was SHE thinking?"

/Bevin