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.”
Story found on Yahoo News.
“There was no agreement that the original deposit would be returned upon request.” That line just cracks me the hell up!
What are your thoughts on this?
So hard to say if I agree or disagree. I don’t think that he should pay child support because the act he was doing would not result in pregnancy!!! Very odd case.
[Reply]
I want my sperm back bitches!
Seriously, this just helps to prove my point that women are insane.
[Reply]
I think because she used his sperm in a way he (or anyone else could ever have imagined), he does have the right to sue for damages. However…he is a father and even if he didn’t intend to be one, he is still responsible for some financial support. A smart judge would order the support minus the damages due to the guy from his weird ass ex gf.
Moral of the story guys? Next time you want your girl to swallow, consider making your deposit on a paper towel and then flush that sucker!
[Reply]
That’s fucking gross. Who saves that?! And in her MOUTH?!
She deserved to be sued for that one.
[Reply]
“However…he is a father and even if he didn’t intend to be one, he is still responsible for some financial support.”
I find that to be absolute bullshit.
1. It’s not like the condom broke, or he just let it go inside her. She saved it, after spitting it out, and used it later. He CLEARLY didn’t want a kid and finished in a way that shouldn’t have gotten him one.
2. She was a big enough bitch to hit him after the kid had been alive for almost 2 year. 2…years. She either wasn’t responsible enough to handle it herself, or is using the kid to get back at him. Either way, at first, she didn’t want him involved, so why should he be now?
3. The kid should be taken away and put up for adoption, because clearly she can’t handle it herself making her an unfit mother.
I feel sorry for that kid, but the responsibility shouldn’t be laid on a father who didn’t even know it existed until two years after it was born.
[Reply]