Man Can Sue Over Surprise Pregnancy
 

CHICAGO - 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."

So now before having sex one should:

1. Picture ID and at least 1 or 2 additional IDs.

2. Run a federal and state background check; hire private eye to do this.

3. Consult with attorney to get the paperwork going.

4. Setup a meeting with the person to whom one wishes to have sex with along with attorney(s) of each party and negotiate/finalize terms.

5. About a month or two later finally have sex, but only as prescribed in agreement; for completeness, this activity should be monitored by an observer / videotaped.

6. Post sex meeting with the person along with attorneys of all parties to ensure that agreement was followed and to close the transaction; renew/extend agreement for another sexual encounter.

Ron

Many years ago I dated a woman with an eight year old daughter. She dated "Vince" for two years, broke up with him, and a short time later discovered she was knocked up. Being as Vince was a total loser, she decided not to tell him he had a daughter. He didn't know until four years later when she filed for food stamps, and made the mistake of listing him as the father.

FOUR YEARS AFTER HIS DAUGHTER WAS BORN Vince's life changed and he was suddenly a father. Imagine the shock he got when he found out he had a daughter. Then factor in that he missed the first four years of his daughter's life - the four most important years for a child to bond with parent. I think he has grounds for a lawsuit.

This women stored his fucking cum after giving him a blow job, and many years later used it to get knocked up with his child. I'm sorry, somewhere along the lines the father has rights too. If she wanted to do this, then fine - but he shouldn't have to pay for it already.

Imagine if some woman gave you a blow job - and you find out she stored your cum for ten years and you now have an four year old daughter that you must be child support for.

"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."

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

From now on I make sure they swallow :winkwink: