If you’re facing divorce, call 203-936-6772 at LAW OFFICES OF PIAZZA & SIMMONS, LLC to set up an initial consultation.

We are open for business in compliance with the State of Connecticut’s guidelines to ensure the safety of our employees and clients and to help stop the spread of COVID-19.

Guiding People Through Divorce With Grace And Dignity For More Than 30 Years

Guiding People Through Divorce With Grace And Dignity For More Than 30 Years

Couple skips step leaves sperm donor open to liability

On Behalf of | Mar 21, 2016 | Family Law |

posted in Child Support

on Thursday, January 10, 2013.

When a couple in Connecticut wants a sperm donor, they do not often expect the donor to be part of the subsequent child’s life, emotionally or financially. This gives people the incentive to donate sperm to couples who cannot create a child on their own. But a recent case that came about after a couple decided to call it quits has resulted in a state seeking payment for financial support it provided to the mother of a child born from donated sperm. The suit also asks that the man pay to help the mother in the future. In other words, the sperm donor is being sued for child support.

In 2009, the 46-year-old man answered an online ad he found seeking a sperm donor for a couple. The three individuals exchanged emails and met before the couple decided to select the man as their donor. They then created an agreement that said he would not be held paternally or financially responsible for the child. After the agreement was signed, the man provided sperm directly to the couple.

This is where state law conflicts with the situation. In the state where the agreement was signed and the sperm was donated, a donor cannot be held accountable for a child if the process involves artificial insemination by a physician. This was not the case for these three individuals-the couple chose to artificially inseminate on their own. By avoiding the use of a doctor, the couple left the man open to liability.

The couple eventually broke up and public assistance was provided to the parent caring for their child. The state then discovered that the biological father was the 46-year-old donor and decided to file a court petition against him. The state is seeking reimbursement for the public benefits provided to the mother and wants the man to make child support payments in the future. The donor wants the case dismissed because he may not be able to afford what the state wants.