May 15, 2007, - 4:59 pm

Does David Crosby Know About This?: Sperm Donor to Lesbians Must Pay Child Support

In one of the most bizarre cases yet, a Pennsylvania Appeals Court ordered a sperm donor to lesbians to pay child support. Oh, and by the way, the sperm donor is dead, so it’s his estate that must pay.
Apparently, the State of Pennsylvania does not have sperm donor shield laws, which protect donors from donating. On the one hand, it seems a bit unfair. But on the other hand, perhaps it will discourage the whole system of sperm donations to single mothers, lesbians, and other “arrangements” that endanger the traditional family in America. There are too many kids born without fathers in America, and it’s a terrible influence on society–engendering crime, substance abuse, and rampant, premature sexuality.
Another issue: The court has held three adults liable as parents to a single child. Could this be the pre-amble to legalized polygamy and other bizarre “family” configurations? You bet.

More from AP:

HARRISBURG – A sperm donor who helped a lesbian couple conceive two children is liable for child support under a state appeals court ruling that a legal expert believes might be the first of its kind.
A Superior Court panel last week ordered a Dauphin County Court judge to establish how much Carl L. Frampton Jr. would have to pay to the birth mother of an 8-year-old boy and 7-year-old girl.
“I’m unaware of any other state appellate court that has found that a child has, simultaneously, three adults who are financially obligated to the child’s support and are also entitled to visitation,” said New York Law School professor Arthur S. Leonard, an expert on sexuality and the law.
But Frampton, 60, of Indiana, Pa., died of a stroke in March, leaving lawyers involved in the case with different theories about how his death might affect the precedent-setting case.
Jodilynn Jacob, 33, and Jennifer Lee Shultz-Jacob, 48, moved in together as a couple in 1996, and were granted a civil-union license in Vermont in 2002. In addition to conceiving the two children with the help of Frampton – a longtime friend of Shultz-Jacob’s – Jacob also adopted her brother’s two older children, now 12 and 13.
But the women’s relationship fell apart, and Jacob and the children moved out of their Dillsburg home in February 2006.
Shortly afterward, a court awarded her about $1,000 a month in support from Shultz-Jacob. Shultz-Jacob later lost an effort to have the court force Frampton to contribute support – a decision that the Superior Court overturned April 30.
Jacob, who now lives in Harrisburg, said Frampton provided some financial support over the years and gradually took a greater interest in the children.
“Part of the decision came down because he was so involved with them,” Jacob said yesterday. “It wasn’t that he went to the [sperm] bank and that was it. They called him Papa.”
Lori Andrews, a Chicago-Kent College of Law professor with expertise in reproductive technology, said that as many as five people could claim some parental status toward a single child if its conception involved a surrogate mother, an egg donor and a sperm donor.

Uh, this is way too much “Brave New World” for me.

In his written opinion requiring Frampton to help pay for the child’s support, Superior Court Judge John T.J. Kelly Jr. noted that Frampton spent thousands of dollars on the children, including purchases of toys and clothing.
“Such constant and attentive solicitude seems widely at variance with the support court’s characterization of [him] having ‘played a minimal role in raising and supporting’ the children,” Kelly said.
The children knew he was their biological father and attended his funeral, but Frampton opposed the effort to compel support from him.

So, the message is to sperm donors: Don’t be involved in kids’ lives and let them have a father. That’s a very bad public policy message. On the other hand, the better message is: Don’t donate sperm to single mothers.

“We made the argument that, according to Pennsylvania law as it stands, there can really only be two adult individuals that can be held liable for support in a child-custody case,” said Frampton’s lawyer, Matthew Aaron Smith.
Shultz-Jacob’s lawyer, Heather Z. Reynosa, wants Frampton’s support obligation to be made retroactive to when Jacob first filed for support. Frampton’s Social Security survivor benefits may also help reduce Shultz-Jacob’s monthly obligation.
It’s unclear how the child-support guidelines, which assume two parents, will be adapted to account for three parents.
“That’s what’s going to be interesting because there’s not a whole lot of guidance out there,” Reynosa said. . . .
About two-thirds of states have adopted versions of the Uniform Parentage Act that can shield sperm donors from being forced to assume parenting responsibilities. Pennsylvania has no such law.

Memo to David Crosby: You know those kids of Melissa Etheridge that you fathered with her ex, Julie Cypher? . . .

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

10 Responses

“A sperm donor who helped a lesbian couple conceive two children is liable for child support”
Not exactly. It is a case of “no good deed goes unpunished” – he [well, his estate] was held liable not because he was the donor of sperm, but because he was the donor of goods and services to a child and its family.
Next up: innumerable charities also have to pay child support because of their record of providing goods and services to children.
Yep, stupidity reigns again.

John Anderson on May 15, 2007 at 6:47 pm

This is soooo sick! I thought that only a hard core communist like David Crosby would willingly contribute to Americas’ decline. Did this poor guy know what he was getting in to? Aren’t donors anonmyous? Only Melissa Etheridge would knowingly accept that grizzled, old brain-dead hippie’s genes for her kid. Sick, sick, I tell ya.

spiffo on May 15, 2007 at 7:15 pm

Excellent post debbie. John THIS is what is sick! Many fathers and to a lesser degree mothers are made “non-custodial” parents by no choice of their own.
States and family court systems PROFIT from the creation of “non-custodial parents”. Hence, for the sake of profits states and court systems are “pimping” our children for money. They are denying one of the fit parents the right to love, guide, nurture and educate their child. Being unfit is another thing. We are talking fit parents and they are turned into “non-custodial” parents everyday in America. This has long-term damaging consequences to our children.
How do states and family court systems profit from this behavior? Federal Title IV-D welfare incentives which are given to the states and family court systems anytime someone is thrown in to the child support system. Guess who pays for these “incentives”…YEP! the taxpayer!!!
Of course, the court systems will find someone to pay child support, even if they are dead! Many people are unaware of how corrupt this system is and how damaging it is to parents, children, families and soceity as a whole.
Review this video:
Plus learn more about Title IV-D here:
Educate others on this!

Angela Pedersen, R.N. on May 15, 2007 at 7:41 pm

I think it has more to do with the Pennsylvannia Courts.
A while back a man had been dutifully paying child support and eventually had a DNA test performed. As the child grew older he saw nothing of himself in the child. The DNA test proved he was not the biological father.
The judge ruled that he had to continue with the payments.

zyzzyg on May 15, 2007 at 8:14 pm

Sperm bank donors are still protected under the law. What made this man vulnerable is that he was a personal friend of the lesbians. In other words, he was a “known donor.” Had they used a sperm bank donor, there would be no case.

AmericanJewess on May 16, 2007 at 2:52 am

It’s good Philadelphia is in Pennsylvania. It’s going to take a lot of (Philadelphia lawyers) to figure it all out.

John Cunningham on May 16, 2007 at 6:31 am

I think it has more to do with the Pennsylvannia Courts.
A while back a man had been dutifully paying child support and eventually had a DNA test performed. As the child grew older he saw nothing of himself in the child. The DNA test proved he was not the biological father.
The judge ruled that he had to continue with the payments.
Posted by: zyzzyg
its the same thing in michigan too

Patriot8 on May 16, 2007 at 7:43 am

While I have some other thoughts on this topic–basically conisistent practice of the law would answer a lot of these things–also these kind of situations show why doing the “superhuman” in order to have a child goes against the way G-d set things up. This requires heroic efforts to thwart his design. Ergo major problems that come with that are guaranteed to come.
I love that art–it well conveys what is going on today in sperm donation for such purpose–sadly the child so conceived has to live with all the supernaturally imposed oddities of such a “genesis.” How would you like to learn this about where you came from? If I woke up being raised by 2 lesbians and came from an anonymous sperm donor (or one that was known) I would see myself as a bit of a freak–(so would everybody else).

BB on May 16, 2007 at 9:25 am

When are women going to held responsible for their actions?
This case just illustrates that today men have no rights in Divorce or Family Courts.

ScottyDog on May 16, 2007 at 12:27 pm

Great post Matt! It’s got everyone thinking about how they eat, limitations and allowances. I really like reading all the perspectives. We are all doing what’s best for our bodies, animals and our earth in our own ways.
replique bulgari bague homme

replique bulgari bague homme on January 2, 2018 at 10:51 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field