Millionaire sperm donor launches custody battle

edited March 2012 in Current Events
A Victorian court will decide whether a millionaire businessman who secretly helped a friend conceive through IVF can claim parental rights.

The man has launched a legal battle over custody of the boy and wants the Family Court to decide if he is considered his parent, the Herald Sun reports.

Under current Victorian law, a sperm donor is not considered the father of any resulting children.

All donors sign a consent form waiving legal rights and responsibilities towards their children.

Are you a sperm donor or have you used a sperm bank service? Tell us your story by sending an email to news.feedback@ninemsn.com.au

Family Court senior registrar John FitzGibbon said the case was based around whether the man was a "friend" or a "friend but with other things agreed".

The woman's lawyer Andrew Robinson said his client had always intended to raise the child as a single mother.

"We don't accept as a matter of law that he Is a parent," he said.

"Just because he donated genetic material doesn't make him a parent."

In a hearing, the court heard the man had kept the child a secret and when he visited the boy, it was at the mother's home.

In a case which could have huge ramifications on hundreds of sperm donor cases, he is now seeking regular access visits with the hope of it resulting in joint custody and parental responsibility.

The man's lawyer, Barrister Tim North, SC, told the court his client had made an "arrangement" with the mother before she began IVF and attended the birth and covered the costs.

The man visited the boy up to three times a week in the lead up to Christmas and Mr North said his client worried his relationship with the child would be damaged if he was no longer allowed to see him.

The woman's lawyer said he was a "family friend" but her relationship with his family was bitter and claimed the man's sister had sent threatening text messages.

Other parties, including IVF providers and the State Government, may join the case because of the apparent conflict between state and Commonwealth law.

Comments

  • what do you think about this? do you think he should claim parental rights?
  • Not unless that was part of the original agreement
  • If he agreed to be the "donor" with no rights/responsibility then he needs to stick with his word & honor the arrangements that was originally made. Hopefully they did a contract witch should be honored in court & inforced, whatever the terms are.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • @armahnismommy I think ur right but as bad as it sound he probably didn't just knock her up bc he wanted the money a lot of people are like that.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • I think he has fallen in love with his child even though he has maybe tried not to. I can't blame him. Sucks for both party's Imo.
  • I think he should be entitled to visitation. He should've never sign those papers!!!
  • I don't think anyone would attend a birth and pay for it unless they wanted to be in that childs life! I think the mom is full of bs!
  • I agree with @heather3rdgirl.

    I think he has every right to sue for parental rights. Obviously he loves his child and wants to be involved. More fathers should be like him.

    If the mother wanted him to have no rights or involvement, she shouldn't have allowed him to pay for her costs and attend the birth.
  • edited March 2012
    Well I see paying for cost. Not being there for the birth though, and allowing him to see and "hang out" with his child. That was sure to make any good guy fall in love with his child.
Sign In or Register to comment.