Support NeoGAF

[Eric-GCA]

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050224/D88F19S80.html

CHICAGO (AP) - An appeals court said a man can press a claim for emotional distress after learning a former lover had used his sperm to have a baby. But he can't claim theft, the ruling said, because the sperm were hers to keep.

The ruling Wednesday by the Illinois Appellate Court sends Dr. Richard O. Phillips' distress case back to trial court.

Phillips accuses Dr. Sharon Irons of a "calculated, profound personal betrayal" after their affair six years ago, saying she secretly kept semen after they had oral sex, then used it to get pregnant.

He said he didn't find out about the child for nearly two years, when Irons filed a paternity lawsuit. DNA tests confirmed Phillips was the father, the court papers state.

Phillips was ordered to pay about $800 a month in child support, said Irons' attorney, Enrico Mirabelli.

Phillips sued Irons, claiming he has had trouble sleeping and eating and has been haunted by "feelings of being trapped in a nightmare," court papers state.

Irons responded that her alleged actions weren't "truly extreme and outrageous" and that Phillips' pain wasn't bad enough to merit a lawsuit. The circuit court agreed and dismissed Phillips' lawsuit in 2003.

But the higher court ruled that, if Phillips' story is true, Irons "deceitfully engaged in sexual acts, which no reasonable person would expect could result in pregnancy, to use plaintiff's sperm in an unorthodox, unanticipated manner yielding extreme consequences."

The judges backed the lower court decision to dismiss the fraud and theft claims, agreeing with Irons that she didn't steal the sperm.

"She asserts that when plaintiff 'delivered' his sperm, it was a gift - an absolute and irrevocable transfer of title to property from a donor to a donee," the decision said. "There was no agreement that the original deposit would be returned upon request."

Phillips is representing himself in the case. He could not be reached for comment Thursday.

"There's a 5-year-old child here," Mirabelli said. "Imagine how a child feels when your father says he feels emotionally damaged by your birth."

Gotta be careful about who you sleep with these days. Not that I have anything to worry about in that regard.

 

[Monk]

If thats the case, why does he have to pay child support?

 

[Eric-GCA]

Re-reading it now, I guess that when you "deliver" sperm to a girl, you are giving her a gift then. Funny. :lol

 

[IJoel]

It's ridiculous that he has to pay child support.

This reminds me of that case where a father found out he wasn't really the father, but had to keep paying support.

 

[bishoptl]

What the...alright fellas, not only must you ensure that she swallows, but keep a 2-liter of Coca Cola handy to wash it down.

 

[NLB2]

Remember fellas, if she doesn't want to swallow, you can always snowball.

 

[Eric-GCA]

I'm still laughing from this quote:

"She asserts that when plaintiff 'delivered' his sperm, it was a gift - an absolute and irrevocable transfer of title to property from a donor to a donee," the decision said. "There was no agreement that the original deposit would be returned upon request."

And taking into account that a child was born because of the "gift".

 

[ShadowRed]

Phillips accuses Dr. Sharon Irons of a "calculated, profound personal betrayal" after their affair six years ago, saying she secretly kept semen after they had oral sex, then used it to get pregnant.

WTF, that's some fucked up shit, this is crazy. Couldn't he argue that if he wanted to get her pregnant he would have "delivered" his sperm to the orifice that would facilitate this, rather her mouth? Man you have to be careful every where now. It's not good enough to wear a rubber or pull out before ejaculating, you have to make sure she doesn't retrieve the condemn or sop up where you unload at.

 

[bishoptl]

retrieve the condemn

:lol that's exactly how the defendant feels now, I bet.

 

[ShadowRed]

Should have been condom, but it works either way. :lol

 

[Monk]

What I dont get is if the passing of sperm is considered a gift, the sperm is then hers. So would using it mean that she is also the father since the guy doesnt have any rights or attribution to the sperm after that?


Its like getting a bat from another person, hitting yourself with it and then blaming the guy who gave you the bat for getting hit by the bat.

 

[gblues]

What the...alright fellas, not only must you ensure that she swallows, but keep a 2-liter of Coca Cola handy to wash it down.

Coke isn't a spermicide. Don't you watch Mythbusters?

Nathan

 

[Dan]

Heh, there was an episode of Spin City just like this, where Michael J Fox sleeps with some chick and then she reveals she's storing his sperm in her freezer and plans to have a kid. He proceeds to have various adventures trying to get his "boys" back. Heh, good stuff.

 

[ShadowRed]

What I dont get is if the passing of sperm is considered a gift, the sperm is then hers. So would using it mean that she is also the father since the guy doesnt have any rights or attribution to the sperm after that?


Its like getting a bat from another person, hitting yourself with it and then blaming the guy who gave you the bat for getting hit by the bat.

Good point. If I buy a car and sign it over to someone else, I'm not legally responsible for car washes or maintaining it.

 

[Loki]

I'd like to ask the person who mouthed off to me about "summary judgment" in a tort reform thread a few months back what happened in this case? How could such a spurious case be deemed fit to stand trial, what with our wonderful "summary judgment"? Sorry for being so blunt, but whoever you were...you're a moron.


I forget who it was, but he'll know who he is if he reads this. In a sane society, suits like this wouldn't be brought, and everyone involved in making such a ridiculous claim would be fined heavily for stressing the system and wasting everyone's time (as well as for the sheer cheek of it all), provided that they have above an 85 IQ. Sorry, but this shit's gotta stop. Those judges seem like real bright bulbs, by the way-- really the sort of minds you'd like adjudicating contentious and weighty issues. <rolleyes>


They should make reality TV shows about idiots like this, so that perhaps intelligent, sane people would tune in again just to mock and heap scorn upon them in a public forum. That'd be great. Yes, I'm entirely serious.

 

[dynamitejim]

Shit, I'm going to have to be more careful about giving blood in the future. 9 months down the line some mad scientist might come kncoking on the door demanding clone support.

 

[Eric-GCA]

/me wholeheartedly agrees with Loki.

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

About the only reason why I can't cum from blowjobs is a blessing. THE ONLY REASON.

 

[Archaix]

I'd like to ask the person who mouthed off to me about "summary judgment" in a tort reform thread a few months back what happened in this case? How could such a spurious case be deemed fit to stand trial, what with our wonderful "summary judgment"? Sorry for being so blunt, but whoever you were...you're a moron.


I forget who it was, but he'll know who he is if he reads this. In a sane society, suits like this wouldn't be brought, and everyone involved in making such a ridiculous claim would be fined heavily for stressing the system and wasting everyone's time (as well as for the sheer cheek of it all), provided that they have above an 85 IQ. Sorry, but this shit's gotta stop. Those judges seem like real bright bulbs, by the way-- really the sort of minds you'd like adjudicating contentious and weighty issues. <rolleyes>


They should make reality TV shows about idiots like this, so that perhaps intelligent, sane people would tune in again just to mock and heap scorn upon them in a public forum. That'd be great. Yes, I'm entirely serious.

How the fuck is this a frivelous suit? This is not at all a "waste of time" or a stress on the system. She spat out his semen and used it to impregneate herself, and now he's got to pay support in addition to waking up every day and realizing that some psycho bitch forced him to have a child.

 

[Jdw40223]

Re-reading it now, I guess that when you "deliver" sperm to a girl, you are giving her a gift then. Funny. :lol

:lol :lol :lol

Yes... a gift indeed.

 

[WedgeX]

"Having oral sex will prevent pregnancy."

Not any more!

 

[Loki]

How the fuck is this a frivelous suit? This is not at all a "waste of time" or a stress on the system. She spat out his semen and used it to impregneate herself, and now he's got to pay support in addition to waking up every day and realizing that some psycho bitch forced him to have a child.

I was referring to the ruling and trial that allowed it to get to this point, not the man's countersuit taking place now. In other words, the lower court's ruling that Phillips is liable for child support in the first place and the whole "the sperm is a gift" rationale cited by the lower court judge(s) in their decision.


It should never have gotten this far, is what I'm saying. I figured that much would be obvious, but I see that I'll have to spell things out next time for the <ahem> slower among us. j/k

 

[BobbyRobby]

If a girl raped me, would I have to pay child support?

 

[Loki]

If a girl raped me, would I have to pay child support?

Dude, your sperm is a gift, however obtained. Deal with it.

 

[Archaix]

I was referring to the ruling and trial that allowed it to get to this point, not the man's countersuit taking place now. In other words, the lower court's ruling that Phillips is liable for child support in the first place and the whole "the sperm is a gift" rationale cited by the lower court judge(s) in their decision.


It should never have gotten this far, is what I'm saying. I figured that much would be obvious, but I see that I'll have to spell things out next time for the <ahem> slower among us. j/k

Oh, jesus christ, that's much better.

But the lower court ruling was on this suit. He didn't file a countersuit, he just sued her. Granted, it came out of the fact that he has to pay child support, but even if he didn't there's a chance some people may sue. And I'm not sure I'd blame them. I know that if a woman forced me to father a child against my will, I'd be pretty damned pissed off, and quite possibly sue for custody if nothing else.

 

[Loki]

Oh, jesus christ, that's much better.

But the lower court ruling was on this suit. He didn't file a countersuit, he just sued her.

Yeah, I know-- I was using "countersuit" in the non-legal sense of the word; she filed a claim for child support and he filed the "countersuit" we see in the article. I wasn't being precise with my terms, obviously.


I also realize that the lower court was ruling on the merits of this particular case and didn't have any say in the child support stuff, though I made a blunder regarding that above. So we actually have two moronic courts: whichever one forced him to collect child support (family court, I imagine? I make it a point not to get too involved with legal stuff for my own sanity's sake ), and the lower court which dismissed his present case.


My point stands, though: in a sane and just world, people (such as the mother of the child in this case) who brought such a spurious claim to court would be censured and fined. Any judge who even entertains such notions (much less comes down in favor of them) should be disrobed imo. Sorry, that's just how I see it. It'll never happen, obviously, but in a perfect world, that's how it would be. In a perfect world, people are punished, not rewarded, for inflicting their idiocy on others and wasting everyone's time and money.

 

[Deleted member 1235]

About the only reason why I can't cum from blowjobs is a blessing. THE ONLY REASON.

The boat that we are both in is shitty and lame.

 

[Archaix]

Yeah, I know-- I was using "countersuit" in the non-legal sense of the word; she filed a claim for child support and he filed the "countersuit" we see in the article. I wasn't being precise with my terms, obviously.


I also realize that the lower court was ruling on the merits of this particular case and didn't have any say in the child support stuff, though I made a blunder regarding that above. So we actually have two moronic courts: whichever one forced him to collect child support (family court, I imagine? I make it a point not to get too involved with legal stuff for my own sanity's sake ), and the lower court which dismissed his present case.


My point stands, though: in a sane and just world, people (such as the mother of the child in this case) who brought such a spurious claim to court would be censured and fined. Any judge who even entertains such notions (much less comes down in favor of them) should be disrobed imo. Sorry, that's just how I see it. It'll never happen, obviously, but in a perfect world, that's how it would be. In a perfect world, people are punished, not rewarded, for inflicting their idiocy on others and wasting everyone's time and money.

Well, there's also the problem that she might not have mentioned the whole turkey baster part of the conception when filing the paternity suit. You don't necessarily have to spell out what point you are trying to make, but giving any sort of hint that you aren't being a total jackass could help

edit: Oh, forgot to comment on this earlier.

"There's a 5-year-old child here," Mirabelli said. "Imagine how a child feels when your father says he feels emotionally damaged by your birth."

Yeah, because that is the part of this story that would fuck with the child's mind.

 

[Loki]

Well, there's also the problem that she might not have mentioned the whole turkey baster part of the conception when filing the paternity suit. You don't necessarily have to spell out what point you are trying to make, but giving any sort of hint that you aren't being a total jackass could help

Yeah, of course she wouldn't have brought it up, but why wouldn't he have brought up the fact that he (apparently) never had intercourse with her? If they questioned her under oath about it (in the paternity case) and she lied, isn't she subject to charges of perjury now that she's contradicted herself in sworn testimony? If not, why not? Regardless, why would it not have been germane to the paternity case? It just seems odd that the issue wouldn't have been raised by his attorneys at some point. If he did have intercourse with her during the time frame necessary for a pregnancy to occur, then why would she even bring up the fact that she stored his semen for later use? Makes no sense-- it would only weaken her position.


Regardless, as soon as it came to light, the order to provide child support should have been rescinded by a judge. Hopefully Phillips will file a claim in family court to do just that now that the information has come out; she'd have to own up to it now, since failing to do so would conflict with her previous testimony given under oath.

Yeah, because that is the part of this story that would fuck with the child's mind.

:lol