Sperm Donor Forced to Pay Child Support

A sperm donor is on the hook for child support after a court in Kansas ruled against him. Apparently, William Marotta donated sperm to a lesbian couple so that they could have a child. The couple fell into financial problems and they are trying to get money out of him now.

Suddenly, anyone who has ever donated sperm to try to help out another family could be at risk if this ruling stands up. The court sought to have Marotta declared the father of the child and financially responsible, despite the fact that he had already signed a written agreement that he would not be liable for child support.

There is still a chance that the court could dismiss the claim when it hears an appeal on January 8, but this story has already garnered a lot of national attention. This case risks putting every sperm donor on notice that they could be sued for child support, even if they have already signed away any rights or responsibilities.

Currently, Kansas is trying to acquire a lot of child support from Marotta, including $6,000 in medical expenses that were related to the child being born three years ago. It seems that William Marotta may now have to pay the price for volunteering to be a donor for a couple that otherwise wouldn't have been able to have a child.

What are your feelings about this case? Should Marotta have to pay even one cent toward the child?

Comments: 9

Sam C. Jan 3, 2013, 8:29pm UTC

No good deed goes unpunished.

reply to this comment

Christine Dantz Jan 3, 2013, 9:53pm UTC

I don't think the guy should have to pay, but, I do think he put himself in that position by how he went about that. Common sense should tell you that responding to a Craigslist Ad and dropping off a container of your sperm to two people you don't know is questionable.

reply to this comment

juli henry Jan 3, 2013, 9:54pm UTC

The journalists here in Kansas who first wrote about this case do not understand the law, or medicine. He is not a bona fide "sperm donor" in the medical sense. He has intercourse with one of the women, but did not donate his sperm via a clinic. Had he donated sperm through the auspices of a clinic, the mother would not have known his name. That said, there really is no "contract" one can sign, short of LEGAL and court sanctioned adoption, that absolves a PARENT, which is what he became when his de fact "donee" became pregnant.

Christine Dantz Jan 3, 2013, 9:56pm UTC

He didn't have sex with her, I read in a separate article that he dropped off a container of his sperm and she used a baster. Or at least that is what is claimed.

juli henry Jan 3, 2013, 10:36pm UTC

While that may be true, there is no way of proving it, and becoming legally absolved of one's biological progeny involves court procedures that simply have not taken place here. Social Rehabilitative Services is doing what they must.......he's the father.

juli henry Jan 3, 2013, 10:43pm UTC

And; here in the wonderful world of Kansas, two women cannot be a matching set of parents, which means that only one of the women in that couple, the biological mother, has legal guardianship and parental right. The child is entitled to a pair of grownups with parental rights, not a full time mother and a father who is misguided about his responsibilities and about how to confer those responsibilities to another. Every child needs parents who can legally be there for him, and I feel very sorry for this kid. I think they will work it out, though, once everyone involved sits down with an attorney who has a sense of humor!

reply to this comment

kathleen w. Jan 3, 2013, 10:16pm UTC

as a single parent i dont think he should beheld liale i am torn between that and its not the childs fault...

reply to this comment

Sperm Donor Forced to Pay Child Support

1 person recommends this post

Comments: 9

Join the Conversation