Here is what I have gathered from numerous news articles.
Angela and Jennifer are two lesbians in their thirties and fourties. They live in the state of Kansas and have eight children “between the two of them.”
My understanding is seven of these children are foster children or children adopted through the foster care system. I do not know if these children are the legal responsibility of one or both women. What I do know is one of the former couple’s children was conceived via a known donor the two women secured through Craigslist.
The two women seperated, but reportedly continue to co-parent these eight children together.
After their split, the biological mother of the donor baby applied for financial assistence from the state.
Question. Obviously if the state picked up the bill for this baby’s birthing expenses, would that not mean the birth mother was already on state assistence??
Anyway. After this child’s birth (she is currently three years old) the couple separated and the state continued placing children in the home! The youngest child in the home is curently a few months old and the couple has been split for eighteen months.
So who is legally reponsible for each of these eight children and why the hell is the state continuing to place children into this home if it is not financially stable?!?
If you apply for state services, the state will attempt to hold the child’s biological parent financially responsible. Child support increases the child’s custodial parent’s income and, therefore, they qualify for fewer services and financial assistance. It is the state’s belief (understandably so) that a child is entitled to financial support from both parents. Therefore, the state of Kansas is seeking child support and birth expenses from the sperm donor for the couple’s child.
In many states, mine included, a sperm donor is not necessarily alleviated of his legal rights and responsibilities unless the insemination occurs in a medical office. Any donor agreement, whether prepared by an attorney or not, is up to the discretion of the court.
There is no legal prescedence in the vast majority of states. Angela and Jennifer inseminated in their home, not in a medical office or facility. The state of Kansas is claiming the agreement between parties is null and void and, therefore, the donor can (and should) be held legally responsible for this child.
I call bullshit.
Let me reiterate something and solve this entire cluster of a mess. The state believes that a child is entitled to financial support from both parents. For all intents and purpouses, Angela Bauer is this donor child’s intended parent; not the donor, regardless of where the insemination occurred.
If you feel Jennifer and Angela were irresponsible in choosing to have a child together, in this manner, then hold them (not the donor) responsible.
Let’s get with the program, people.
Regardless of anything, if Ash and I were to severe our relationship, she would be responsible for our child. Period. She is the Mama. She is the parent. There wouldn’t even be a question where responsibility lies and there shouldn’t be in this situation either.
I wil be watching the outcome of this case very closely. Laws need to be changed. Families headed by same sex parents need to be protected. Children of same sex parents deserve the same accommodations as those of heterosexual parents.
Let’s hope the state of Kansas sets the path for these changes!