A sperm donor must pay child support in the State of Kansas. A man named William Marotta thought he was doing a good deed for a lesbian couple who wanted to raise a baby. He donated his sperm to the couple, signed away his parental rights and went on with his life. So, imagine his surprise when he found himself on the receiving end of a child support order.
The 46-year-old man and his wife met with the couple, Angela Bauer and Jennifer Schreiner, back in 2009 after spotting their ad on Craigslist. Bauer and Schreiner offered $50 per donation, but Marotta agreed to contribute his DNA for free. In addition to relinquishing his parental rights, the contract that he signed stipulated that he would retain no financial responsibility for the child.
According to a Dec. 31, 2012 report by ABC News, the agreement read, "Jennifer and Angie further agree to indemnify William and hold him harmless for any child support payments demanded of him by any other person or entity, public or private, including any district attorney's office or other state or county agency, regardless of the circumstances or said demand." However, when Bauer and Schreiner sought financial assistance from the Kansas Department of Children and Families, the department demanded to know the identity of the child's father.
Unfortunately for Marotta, it appears that no good deed goes unpunished. The state refuses to acknowledge the contract that he and the couple signed because the artificial insemination was not performed by a physician. The sperm donor is to pay child support for the child including $6,000 in medical expenses.
Marotta's attorney is taking the issue to court on Jan. 8, 2013 when Marotta's motion to dismiss will be heard. His attorney provided the following sound argument: "If, as the petitioner alleges, the use of a licensed physician is a primary requirement...then any woman in Kansas could have sperm donations shipped to her house, inseminate herself without a licensed physician and seek out the donor for financial support because her actions made him a father, not a sperm donor. This goes against the very purpose of the statute to protect sperm donors as well as birth mothers."
Should this sperm donor's child support case be dismissed, or does he have a responsibility to pay for the child he helped create? Comments are welcome.