(no subject)
Mar. 8th, 2005 04:28 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Two doctors in Illinois have oral sex. Afterwards, Dr Sharon Irons, without telling Dr Richard Phillips, keeps the semen she took in orally and uses it to get pregnant. Two years later she brings a paternity suit against the unwitting sap, and wins a court order that he's the father; he now has to pay $800 a month upkeep for the child. (At least Bill Clinton escaped that.)
Phillips, understandably miffed at having to support the kid without even the pleasure of having been laid, returned to court with a wheeze of his own - accusing Irons of stealing his sperm and of causing him emotional distress, for which he demanded compensation. Her secret keeping of the semen was, Phillips said, a "calculated, profound personal betrayal"; he had trouble eating and sleeping and had "feelings of being trapped in a nightmare". His case was based on the premise that she had "deceitfully engaged in sexual acts, which no reasonable person would expect could result in pregnancy, to use the plaintiff's sperm in an unorthodox, unanticipated manner yielding extreme consequences".
Last week, an Illinois appeal court turned down his accusation of theft on her part and agreed with Irons's argument that, when he "delivered" his sperm to her, "it was a gift, an absolute and irrevocable transfer of title to property from a donor to a donee. There was no agreement that the original deposit [sic] would be returned upon request." (Is that "gift" tax-deductible, I wonder?) But the court did give him the go-ahead to pursue his claim for emotional distress.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1432504,00.html
Phillips, understandably miffed at having to support the kid without even the pleasure of having been laid, returned to court with a wheeze of his own - accusing Irons of stealing his sperm and of causing him emotional distress, for which he demanded compensation. Her secret keeping of the semen was, Phillips said, a "calculated, profound personal betrayal"; he had trouble eating and sleeping and had "feelings of being trapped in a nightmare". His case was based on the premise that she had "deceitfully engaged in sexual acts, which no reasonable person would expect could result in pregnancy, to use the plaintiff's sperm in an unorthodox, unanticipated manner yielding extreme consequences".
Last week, an Illinois appeal court turned down his accusation of theft on her part and agreed with Irons's argument that, when he "delivered" his sperm to her, "it was a gift, an absolute and irrevocable transfer of title to property from a donor to a donee. There was no agreement that the original deposit [sic] would be returned upon request." (Is that "gift" tax-deductible, I wonder?) But the court did give him the go-ahead to pursue his claim for emotional distress.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1432504,00.html
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-08 04:31 pm (UTC)This makes me want to say something pithy and vitriolic about the state of the world today.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-08 04:32 pm (UTC)The mind boggles.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-08 04:34 pm (UTC)keep the tissue
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-08 05:31 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-09 11:00 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-09 03:25 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-08 06:55 pm (UTC)My 'sperm donor' was concious all the time, 100% of the time, he has never paid a penny.
Rose
xx
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-08 08:30 pm (UTC)