5
   

Woman uses sperm to get pregnant. Man sues.

 
 
Reply Thu 24 Feb, 2005 05:37 pm
Quote:
Court: Man can sue for distress over surprise pregnancy, but sperm were hers to keep
February 24, 2005 1:09 PM EST

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 (euro603) 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."



Shocked
Laughing
I cant not imagine being the lawyer in this case..
No matter what side.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 5 • Views: 13,201 • Replies: 36
No top replies

 
SCoates
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Feb, 2005 05:41 pm
I can't believe she won child support. That is an insult.
0 Replies
 
shewolfnm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Feb, 2005 05:48 pm
isnt it!!!
I thought that was a big crock of sh*t.
0 Replies
 
sublime1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Feb, 2005 05:56 pm
Quote:
"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."


That is hilarious!

The gift that keeps on giving.
0 Replies
 
Don1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Feb, 2005 09:24 am
SCoates wrote:
I can't believe she won child support. That is an insult.


It is (somewhat) comforting to know that Britain doesn't hold the monopoly on brainless judges.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Fri 25 Feb, 2005 09:34 am
SHARON?

"mff mm mff?"

WHY ARE YOU HOLDING THAT TUBE OF LIQUID NITROGEN?

"mff mmfhm mfff mfffm"

WHAT?

"Isaid, I just wanna save your love, Dick"
0 Replies
 
Crazielady420
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Feb, 2005 09:38 am
that is one disturbing story
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Feb, 2005 09:40 am
Yeah, I was wondering about the logistics. Decided probably a quick trip to the bathroom to ya know freshen up.

Has to be something punishable there. I mean, women have to do the 9-month and childbearing thing, but even so, can you imagine what would happen if, say, a guy made sure there was a hole in his condom and lied about it/ made sure she didn't notice?

No, not even that is a good parallel -- condoms do sometimes legitimately break, nobody has ever gotten pregnant from oral sex.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Feb, 2005 09:44 am
well with this single exception.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Feb, 2005 09:48 am
True, true.
0 Replies
 
eoe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Feb, 2005 10:34 am
It's really a shame. I think the guy should be let off the hook financially and emotionally (let him decide to contribute if he chooses) and to hell with mommy but that would be hurtful to the poor innocent child who had nothing to do with this mess. And it's too late to take the child away from her. Again, screw her feelings but why punish the child?
It really is one of the messiest cases I've ever heard of. What is this world coming to?
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  2  
Reply Fri 25 Feb, 2005 01:39 pm
First, let me say that I can't wait for this opinion to be published.

Secondly, I agree that the mother here is truly wacky.

Thirdly, although mom is a nut, that is no reason for the child to suffer. In this regard, I am with eoe: just because we may want to punish the mother doesn't mean that we should punish the child. The man is the child's father, despite the fact that he was practicing what he justifiably thought was extremely safe sex. As a father (albeit an unwitting and unwilling one), he has the responsibility to provide for his child.

It's bad enough that this kid will go through life bearing both the stigma of its conception and the burden of having a weirdly disturbed mother. In comparison, monthly child support checks from dad is small recompense.
0 Replies
 
SCoates
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Feb, 2005 03:18 pm
I completely disagree. He has no responsibility as a father but that which he chooses to take on.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Feb, 2005 05:26 pm
Her act is utterly despicable. That actually makes me feel sick.

The thorny part, though, as people have said, is the child not suffering......I have no idea what to suggest is fair.
0 Replies
 
shewolfnm
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Feb, 2005 06:46 pm
sozobe wrote:

Has to be something punishable there. I mean, women have to do the 9-month and childbearing thing, but even so, can you imagine what would happen if, say, a guy made sure there was a hole in his condom and lied about it/ made sure she didn't notice?
.


I remember a case that was exactly that not too long ago. ( with in the past 5 years)
the man who was 19 at the time, had charges brought against him for a type of sexual assult. I dont remember the specifics, but he got his punishment quickly.
I just dont see how this doesnt apply to the woman. She admitted to SNEAKING his sperm to get pregnant. It was no accident on her part, and truthfuly , no accident for him either . Oral sex never leaves a man wondering if he is a daddy...
0 Replies
 
theantibuddha
 
  1  
Reply Tue 1 Mar, 2005 01:58 am
By the exact same logic were you to pick up some skin cells that I threw away (legal abandonment), extract the DNA, splice it with that of a woman and place it inside an egg you could legally expect me to take responsibility for the child. Am I the only one seeing a problem with this?

The man should claim custody of the child. She clearly has personality issues that would make her an unsuitable parent. Sure that's not what he wants, but it would be a fitting punishment for her. One hopes additionally that her name reaches the papers making no-one ever risk sleeping with her again.
0 Replies
 
Debra Law
 
  1  
Reply Tue 1 Mar, 2005 02:37 am
he said, she said
That's HIS story. He claims he had a four-month affair, but never had sexual intercourse. He claims they only had oral sex three times.

HER story is entirely different:

Court: Unexpectant father can sue for distress, but she didn't steal sperm
Associated Press
02/24/2005

CHICAGO - What happened between Dr. Richard O. Phillips and Dr. Sharon Irons six years ago is a "he said-she said" story.

Whatever happened - either oral sex or intercourse - led to both a baby and a suit.

The Illinois Appeals Court said earlier this week that Phillips can press a claim for emotional distress after learning Irons had used his sperm to have a baby. But he can't claim theft, the judges ruled, because the sperm were hers to keep.

Irons said Thursday in a telephone interview that she and Phillips had intercourse several times during their brief affair.

Phillips said in his suit that he and Irons never had intercourse, only oral sex. DNA tests showed Phillips was the baby's father, court papers state.

The ruling sends the case back to Cook County Circuit Court, where Phillips must try to prove his side of the story.

In his suit, Phillips accused Irons of "calculated, profound personal betrayal" of him six years ago.

He is representing himself in the case. Messages left at his office Thursday were not immediately returned.

Phillips alleges that he and Irons never had intercourse during their four-month tryst, although they did have oral sex three times. His suit contends that Irons, without his knowledge, kept some of his semen and used it to impregnate herself.

The relationship ended, the suit said, when Phillips learned Irons had lied to him about being recently divorced and was, in fact, still married to another doctor.

Irons told a different story Thursday. Not only did Phillips know she was still married during their affair, she said, he also knew she was pregnant with his child. He even watched her do several pregnancy tests, she said.

"He was very supportive and very happy about it," she said. "He said you need to hurry up and get your divorce." He promised to marry her and asked her to quit her job, she said.

But several days before her last day at work, Phillips informed her that he "couldn't go through with it," she said.

Phillips is a Chicago family doctor. Irons practices internal medicine in suburban Olympia Fields.

Nearly two years after their affair ended, Irons filed a paternity suit against Phillips. Phillips was ordered to pay $800 a month in child support, said Irons' attorney, Enrico Mirabelli.

Phillips then sued Irons, claiming her actions caused him nausea and headaches and robbed him of sleep and his appetite. He is haunted by "feelings of being trapped in a nightmare," court papers state.

Irons said Thursday that Phillips' lawsuit astounded her.

"I was already devastated by the fact he abandoned me," she said. "I just couldn't believe it. I read it. I put it down. I cried."

Irons' legal response was 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' suit 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."

But the appeals court judges agreed Irons 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."

Irons said Thursday that she and Phillips met in medical school and had been good friends over the years before they started a sexual relationship in 1999.

"It's crazy how far he's taken this," she said.

Source
0 Replies
 
Montana
 
  1  
Reply Tue 1 Mar, 2005 02:54 am
I knew there had to be another side to the story. His side just seems very far fetched.
0 Replies
 
theantibuddha
 
  1  
Reply Tue 1 Mar, 2005 03:25 am
The phrasing of the first article led me to assume that she admitted to the action and that it was only on the technicality that he "gave" the sperm that the case was dismissed.

Now that I think about it, the enzymes in saliva would probably be quite harmful to sperm in any kind of prolonged exposure in the mouth. The chance of becoming pregnant by holding sperm in your mouth and then attempting to insert it (not to mention the additional difficulties added by keeping this process secret) would be significantly reduced.

I think I believe her story above his. It seems to make more sense.
0 Replies
 
eoe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 1 Mar, 2005 08:30 am
There's always two sides to every story.
Thank goodness.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How a Spoon Can Save a Woman’s Life - Discussion by tsarstepan
Well this is weird. - Discussion by izzythepush
Please Don't Feed our Bums - Discussion by Linkat
Woman crashes car while shaving her vagina - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Genie gets sued! - Discussion by Reyn
Humans Marrying Animals - Discussion by vinsan
Prawo Jazdy: Ireland's worst driver - Discussion by Robert Gentel
octoplet mom outrage! - Discussion by dirrtydozen22
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Woman uses sperm to get pregnant. Man sues.
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/22/2019 at 04:55:51