The child support system in the United States is a mess. Too many states follow formulas that don't serve the needs of individual families and leave many non-custodial parents feeling stripped of their rights while many custodial parents feel they are forced to wait and wait through bureaucratic processes before receiving their money. There are some single parents who are happy with the way child support works, but they are hard to come by.
Chukwudera B. Okoli is a man in Massachusetts (I hesitate to even call him a "father") who has every right to hate the system right now. Currently, he's being forced to pay child support to the children born via IVF to Blessing Okoli, his former wife.
The story is so unfair, it will make you want to scream. But the issues it raises are even more troubling. Are sperm donors fathers now?
Even in the case of an anonymous sperm donor, the child support may be in the best interest of the children. After all, children need the support of two parents. But morally it's wrong. Isn't a man a person, too? Don't they have rights? What kind of mother purposely creates and gives birth to a child (or children) she can't afford and then changes her mind about an agreement?
Ashley Is a Widow Who Stays Strong...
This Hot Dad Wants to Vacuum Your Rug
This Hot Dad Wants to Do Your Ironing
KStew Refuses to Shower
Comments 59
My wife and I used a donor when we conceived our first child, and we never would have considered making the donor responsible for our child. It's absurd.
For those bashing donors, my partner and myself are the type of parents who use such services.
I think this is the most ridiculous article I've ever ready bashing the idea of sperm donors. The 'father' in this case was NOT a sperm donor - he was a husband, either separated or not, who willingly did his business in a cup so his wife could conceive. He KNEW what those sperm were to be used for. An anonymous sperm donor is NOT anything but a biological contributor to making a child - a service provided. Waivers are signed, they're anonymous for a reason and not held liable for the child in any way. Imagine the legal ramifications if sperm donors everywhere started coming forward and demanding to be part of 'their' child's life? The contracts and waivers are for everyone's safety. And I have to say that assuming a man who has a one night stand shouldn't be held accountable is also ridiculous. A man knows how to use a condom. If he doesn't use it, it's his own damn fault if he gets a woman pregnant and has to pay up child support. It also serves that same woman right if she has to share custody with a total stranger because she didn't make sure he used one too. Birth control isn't a responsibility only for a woman. If a man's gonna do the deed he better make sure he's ready for any outcome.
nope, , she KNEW going through with it she would be a 'single' mom, and forcing him to pay is just plain selfish and what is the child supposed to think later ?
as one who had to become a mom by the 'generousity' of an anonymous sperm donor, i would hate to see this scare off potential donors for other women in my prediciment. Its a shameful situation this woman created
This is an interesting case, Im not sure. I think I would need more info.
That is stupid. Men chose where to put that sperm, including into a cup, or into a 1 night stand.
I don't think sperm banks should exist. People need to be more responsible mothers AND fathers, and not go around creating random children that NEITHER of them can take care of.
"Women that get donated sperm should be able to afford a child". Yes. I agree. To a point. But what about the men who are willingly creating these children with strangers? Should they not be required as well? They obviously want a child floating around in their DNA, they just don't want to care for it?
Placing all the responsibility on mothers is backwards thinking.
that was a cheep shot by the ex-wife. L-A-M-E. He should not have to pay because even tho they were married they have a divorce decree. Did she "get pregnant" before or after the papers were signed? if its after I think he is off the hook. Morally he should pay but really. . . the sperm should of been destroyed when they divorced.
According to the article, the twins were conceived through in-vitro fertilization. The donor sperm is the defendant's and the donor egg was donated by someone else (a random donor). The procedure was done after the couple separated. Here is the timeline.
Married in 1991 and tried to conceive but were unsuccessful. During their marriage, they were placed on a donor egg list for an IVF.
Separated in 2000.
In 2001, donor eggs were available. The ex-wife acquired the defendant's consent to proceed with the IVF.
In may 2003, the twins were born.
The husband did give his consent, however he'd consented to the procedure under duress. His wife threatened to obstruct his U.S. citizenship application.