Thanks, Cheryl, that fills some of the gaps.
Hi, Kobi. You wrote:
"The comments suggesting an ulterior motive on the part of the biological mother and what seems to be a willingness to excuse the sperm donor feels misogynistic to me."
Now I see that the mom isn't behind the suit, it's the state agency (I still don't understand how it's "mysoginistic" of the state to file the suit, but I'll listen and stay open to that—maybe I'll change my mind when I hear more).
It appears the agency feels it has a legal wedge created by ambiguity in the law, and it's going to use it. Maybe the legislation will change to prevent it happening in the future.
Regarding the second part of what you wrote, I don't see how it's "mysoginistic" to "excuse" the donor from having to pay child support for a child he agreed to help create with $50-worth of sperm, no strings attached on either side, all parties on board with that.
(Maybe I misunderstood what you wrote?)
Assuming I didn't, all I can say is, I'll stay open and maybe when there's more information, I'll change my mind on that one.
And it doesn't matter.
Tuesday, the courts decide without our input
