請參考這個案例，您就知道為什麼您的先生必須付child support

Man Who Conceived Children With Girlfriend Through IVF Must Pay Child Support, Washington Supreme Court Rules
Main Category: Fertility News
Article Date: 19 Sep 2005 - 21:00pm (PDT)




A married man who conceived children with his girlfriend through in vitro fertilization must continue to pay child support as the legal father of the children, the Washington state Supreme Court ruled on Thursday in a unanimous decision that overturned a 2004 appellate court decision, the Seattle Times reports (O'Hagan, Seattle Times, 9/16). Teresa Brock underwent IVF using Michael Kepl's sperm in 1998 and gave birth later that year. Kepl signed a sworn affidavit of paternity, maintained a relationship with the child and paid up to $650 monthly in unofficial child support. Brock in 2001 used Kepl's sperm to conceive a second child through IVF and gave birth after her relationship with Kepl ended. Although Brock said Kepl gave her permission to use his sperm, Kepl claims he did not authorize his sperm to be used for the second pregnancy. However, Brock said Kepl continued to pay child support, increasing it to $1,000 monthly, until 2002, when Kepl's wife learned of their relationship. Kepl then stopped all contact with and payments to Brock. Kepl said he did not intend to be a parent and donated the sperm as a friend (La Corte, AP/Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 9/15). Brock in February 2002 filed a petition to establish her two children's paternity and child-support payments (Seattle Times, 9/16). A trial judge ruled that Kepl had to pay child support, but in May 2004 a three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals reversed the decision, saying Kepl was protected by a state law that shields a sperm donor from responsibility or custody rights unless he and the mother sign a fatherhood rights contract. However, the Supreme Court on Thursday said Kepl did not qualify as an anonymous donor as "numerous photographs, letters and cards" proved the paternity of the first child and his relationship with Brock. "At issue is whether ... a biological father is the legal father of two boys conceived by means of assisted reproductive technology by a woman to whom the man was not married," the court wrote. Kepl did not comment on the case (AP/Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 9/15).

所有跟帖： 

• 回複：請參考這個案例，您就知道為什麼您的先生必須付child support -aconfusedwife- ♀ (157 bytes) () 09/12/2006 postreply 19:33:54