Court: Man Can Sue Over Surprise Pregnancy
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: February 24, 2005
Filed at 1:56 p.m. ET
CHICAGO (AP) -- 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.
Advertisement
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.''
Where do you find these stories? I've got to start reading the paper more closely. I guess we should look for ladies who don't mind swallowing!
This made the Drudge report today-
-- Modified on 2/25/2005 10:39:24 PM
...a "non-starter" and a "non-finisher", I think I'm relatively safe from this sort of thing.
Does that make you a "tweener"?
This is one of the strangest things I've ever heard. I wonder if she saved it in a tube or something and had it professionally inseminated, or if it was a turkey baster job. If she did it all herself, I don't see how there's any proof that they didn't have intercourse which led to the pregnancy, unless she admitted to the scheme.
Read (between the lines) where they offered some quotes about the lawsuits.
It didn't come right out and say it but somehow I got the same impression, that she had openly admitted that it wasn't intercourse.
Which brings to mind an interesting question... would we support the child support judgement if it were sex, but not if it's a blowjob? I mean really, what's the real difference?
I can only imagine she might have direct delivered the mouthful to her vag. Perhaps a gymnast/contortionist or double jointed?
What a visual though.
EEEEWWWWW!!!!! However, it would seem that the sperm would've died in her mouth or somewhere else in the process before she could've gotten it into her vagina. I guess not. Bizarre story, & unfortunately for the child he's got losers for his parents.
The funniest think was the sperm was considered a gift. I know what my girl friends are getting for christmas. lol
Passing of title of personal property. Never quite viewed it in that amnner.
Judges are really being imaginative here! A gift? Yes, with the idea that it would be significantly dead sperm in a couple minutes.
I would have argued that it's more like her scavanging, and that genetic material used to conceive like that was solely the financial responsibility of the scavanger.
This is an extremely nauseating step for male genetic rights. I'm afraid this case will have great significance in the future.
But the argument was moot anyway, since there's not proof the child wasn't conceived in the ordinary way. Just a bizarre grounds to sue, but if it wasn't real this time, no doubt other desperate women will try it.
How'd you like to be told that you were conceived this way? 
Is there no morality left in the world?
Uh, guys.... sperm live for some considerable time - hours or days - after ejctulation, if the semen is maintained in a liquid state.
It seems to me that the biological father would have no more responsibility for providing child support than a donor in a sperm clinic.
Or allowed it to harden...
That would have been a curious court room argument! "But your honor, she said she'd swallow every drop!"
I'll admit I had no idea it could live for days in its own ejaculatory fluid without any temperature regulation. (In the vagina, I knew it could live that long.)
-- Modified on 2/26/2005 4:24:37 AM
Shared custody...he could even threaten to try for full custody on the theory that what kind of person does such a thing?
I got the impression she admitted it was oral sex that she then used to get herself pregnant...even under that circumstance the kid is in no way at fault and still has to be supported no matter how despicable the mother might be...the kid exists now no matter how it was conceived
She also seems like she specially chose this particular man so as to get $800 per month...face it she could of done the paperboy but he wouldn't be able to support a kid...she deliberately picked a relatively rich guy to screw over
So why doesn't he try for shared custody?...neither he nor her would have to pay each other and he'd get to know his little boy...I think going for FULL-custody would be overkill but he could use the threat of it to get her to be reasonable...I'd think most judges given the circumstances would be inclined to think she must have a few screws loose getting pregnant this way and that this shouldn't be encouraged or more women would start doing it too
It sounds like both parents have a very skewed sence of reality. Planned or not, expected concequence or not, the most important thing is the child.
If the lady planned and executed this deliberatly as he alleges (and as some have stated she may have even admitted to) one definatly needs to look at her motivations. Was this specificaly so that she could some nearly 3 yrs later start cashing in on the child? If so why did she not sue for support once she was possitive she was pregnant? after all u are talking at 800 a month approximatly $24,000.
Of course there are other reasons a lady may deliberatly decieve a gent to become pregnant that should be looked at. Was her biological clock ticking? Did she feel herself in-love with the guy and think that if she became pregers that would keep the relationship alive? Or maybe she knew things were coming to an end and did not want it to thus felt at least she could take a part of him with her. In any of these instances the realities of expense and work of raising a child could have hit her at a later date thus the late filing for child support.
Then again of course there are 3 other ways this could have come about by accident. 1. Failure of what ever birth control was being used. 2. No birth control. 3. It has been known for a virgin to actualy get pregnant when not quite going all the way a drop of cum on the lips etc can actualy if active sperm allow one of those swimers to actualy make the journey (note I would think a bit easier if she is equaly excited and moist would be needed for such an event. Like I said this is rare but it has been documented.
Now we get to the real problem, frankly in my oppinion, Phillips is missing out on what could be the most wonderful thing to ever happen. Rather than looking at the negatives, he should be looking at the joys. (please note I am assuming that he was not married to an other at the time the child was concieved thus is not likely to have lost a wife etc,) I honestly believe no matter the circumstances surrounding the conception of this child that he needs to grow up and quit thinking only of himself. He needs to spend some time with the child (provided he is a person whom would not harm said child either mentaly or physicaly) He should rather be angry at the joys he has missed if anything. First steps, having the child run up to him and say DADDY! The humor of the child crawling into the dresser being moved that drawers are out of and then standing up thus being caught in jail. The pride one feels when said child confronts one's college profesor and quite indignantly demands to know why he would not let his mom do any art in class, after all his teachers let him do art. The giggles when same child actualy makes an other his parent's teachers blush in front of the entire class.
As an aside I had an uncle whom passed away a couple of months ago. When I was young he was known to move and change jobs quite frequently so as to avoid paying child support. The last time I saw him before he passed away he asked me to help him try to locate his daughter. His refusal to pay child support (until the IRS took care of that) may be the cause of animosity his ex wife had for him and it is well known that such can be passed on to the child or children involved. (an other personal note, because of having seen things like custodial parent refusing to allow non custodial parent to vist with kids as a form of revenge, I feel proud that I was so determined not to do so I took my ex to court for not showing up for visits after all it hurt me to see my son hurt when his dad did not come) Either way his daughter had refused any contact for years. I have to wonder what will this man be thinking 30 40 yrs from now as he comes to the end of his life.
Back to the topic at hand, facts are facts, both admit to having a rather intimate relationship which resulted in a gift to the world. Both need to toss out their personal baggage and rejoice in the life which was created, never, never, never punish the child for the crimes of the parent. Bring them into your hearts and love them for the potential they hold. After all children are our future
You are correct in that the child is the only important part of the scenrio. However, if she did what is accused, he should be quite clear that the relationship is with the child, not the mother. What she (allegedly) did is a horrible act of deceit, pure and simple. My wife told me about this story this morning, and she was appalled that a woman would be so manipulative. So, I know it's not just a man's perspective.