Sperm Donor Fights For Rights In Court

Lawyer Blogs

Both the Alliance Defense Fund & Keys for Networking, Inc. filed Amicus Briefs in the United States Supreme Court in support of attorney Jeffery M. Leving’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari. Leving filed the Petition for Writ of Certiorari on behalf of Daryl Hendrix, a Topeka sperm donor, to protect Daryl’s constitutional rights to parent his twin children.

Mr. Hendrix donated his genetic material to attorney Samantha Harrington, who conceived their twins who are now three years-old.  The case explores vast uncharted territory in the law where there have been inconsistent rulings on the rights and obligations of sperm donors from one court to another in this nation. “This case will have significant ramifications on the future of fathers’ rights and reproductive technology. When we reach a point in society when a father has been reduced to nothing more than a genetic vending machine, then we have reached a point of hopelessness for our children. We should be encouraging fathers to be constant figures in their children’s lives instead of legally baring their fundamental human right to parent,” states Leving, “we must not forget that any man’s loss of his children diminishes mankind,” he added.

Mr. Hendrix initially petitioned the Shawnee County District Court in Kansas to afford him parental rights and provide for his son and daughter financially. Ms. Harrington countered by filing a paternity action. Mr. Hendrix maintains that he and the mother, Ms. Harrington, had an oral agreement to co-parent their children together. Both of those cases were dismissed by a district court judge, prompting Hendrix to appeal the decision in the Kansas Supreme Court. The Kansas Supreme Court decided, 4-2, that a sperm donor must have a written agreement with the mother in order to exercise any parental rights. That decision annihilated Daryl’s inherent rights as a father and treads dangerously on redefining fatherhood.

On Monday, March 17, 2008, attorneys for Hendrix appealed to the United States Supreme Court, asking for the ruling of the Kansas Supreme Court to be overturned. This appeal will clearly be a landmark case that will determine the future of reproductive technology, alternative child conception, and advancement of fathers’ rights. “Mr. Hendrix’s case deserves to be heard in our nation’s highest court and their decision can guide the future of reproductive technology. We want to make sure that Mr. Hendrix’s children know that they have a father who loves them, who will support them emotionally and financially. We want the children to know that they have a father who will spend time with them and help to raise them and that they did not just spring out of a test tube,” states Andrey Filipowicz, co-counsel with Jeffery M. Leving.

In a similar case in Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that the verbal agreement between the sperm donor and the mother was “valid on its face” and that ‘Biological parents cannot waive the interests of a child — a third party — who has an independent "right" to support from each one of them.’ The Court ordered the sperm donor to pay over $1500 a month in child support, even though he was not named as the father on the birth certificate of the children. A British Court had a similar finding in the case of a man who donated his sperm to a lesbian couple.

Attorney Jeffery M. Leving states, “The legal system has not kept current with science and reproduction technology and its effects on the changing American family. The U.S. Supreme court now has the opportunity to correct this flaw in our judicial system and protect an important relationship between a loving father and his children”.  Leving is a nationally renowned litigator, advocate of fathers’ rights and founder of dadsrights.com.

For more information on the case and all media inquiries, please contact Carrie Klepzig at 312-807-3990, ext. 255 or 312-730-5864 (mobile).

Related listings

  • Court orders YouTube to give Viacom video logs

    Court orders YouTube to give Viacom video logs

    Lawyer Blogs 07/05/2008

    Dismissing privacy concerns, a federal judge overseeing a $1 billion copyright-infringement lawsuit against YouTube has ordered the popular online video-sharing service to disclose who watches which video clips and when.U.S. District Judge Louis L. S...

  • Florida Supreme Court nixes Indian casino pact

    Florida Supreme Court nixes Indian casino pact

    Lawyer Blogs 07/03/2008

    The Florida Supreme Court is overturning the agreement Gov. Charlie Crist signed with the Seminole Tribe to expand gambling at its casinos.The court ruled Thursday that Crist doesn't have the constitutional authority to enter into the agreement that ...

  • Judges rip Texas courts in death penalty case

    Judges rip Texas courts in death penalty case

    Lawyer Blogs 07/02/2008

    A federal appeals court blasted Texas courts for refusing to hold a hearing to consider evidence that a convicted killer may be mentally disabled, therefore ineligible for the death penalty.A three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC

A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party

Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party

However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.

Business News

New York & New Jersey Family Law Matters We represent our clients in all types of proceedings that include termination of parental rights. >> read