Men’s sperm belongs to MEN
What’s the difference between sperm samples and discarded toenails?
Answer: A landmark case in the UK has ruled the former is still a man’s property.
Sperm samples – given by the men after they were warned by doctors that chemotherapy might damage their fertility – were the property of the six NHS patients who can claim damages for the loss according to the ruling.
The six men have won their claim for damages in a landmark judgement which establishes the legal principle that a man’s semen is his own property.
The precedent is worthy of celebration yet a lot more is needed for men to truly have ownership of their sperm.
Some women steal sperm from men and use it to impregnate themselves. Whether it by having sex with an under-age boy or using syringes to squirt the sperm into their vagina, they bear a child and claim 19 years of child support because of the biological link.
Strange how biology only matters when child support is wanted.
One such case made headlines when a female doctor used a condom for oral sex with a male doctor and later impregnated herself with the sperm inside the condom after is was thrown away, waited 2 years, insisted on a DNA test and claimed child support.
The courts ruled that the sperm no longer belonged to Dr. Phillips.
‘Trapped in a nightmare’
Dr.Phillips sued Dr. 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.”
Any normal person would easily consider this women ‘one hell of a bitch’ but that doesn’t count with, “in the best interest of the child” drivel courts have bought into under feminist governance.
Men’s rights advocate Glenn Sacks and family law attorney Jeffery M. Leving have also written an article on the theft of men’s sperm.
All’s fair in love, war, and paternity cases. When child support is sought, there is scarcely any deceit that courts won’t push aside under the “best interests of the child” test.
Courts have ruled that boys who were statutorily raped by older women must pay child support. Courts have ruled that when a woman has taken the semen from a condom a man used for sex with a different woman and has inserted it in herself, the man must still pay child support. Courts have ruled that when a woman has concealed her pregnancy (denying the man the right to be a father) and then sued for child support a decade later, the man must still pay child support. Courts have ruled that when a woman has deceived her husband into believing that her baby is his child, he must still pay child support. Few if any men are relieved of child support obligations due to the circumstances of the pregnancy, no matter how bizarre or unjust.
Sadly, the case in the UK is lacking the rights of discarded property but ownership may just be a start for men’s justice.
In yesterday’s judgment the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, the most senior judge in England and Wales, rejected the notion that sperm held by North Bristol NHS Trust had the same legal status as a discarded toenail or hair cut at a barber’s shop.
Lord Judge, Master of the Rolls Sir Anthony Clarke, and Lord Justice Wilson, ruled that the sperm samples — given by the men after they were warned by doctors that chemotherapy might damage their fertility — were the property of the six who could claim damages for the loss. “Unlike products of the body which are removed from it with a view to their being abandoned — such as cut hair, clipped nails, excised tissue and amputated limbs — the sperm was ejaculated with a view to its being kept,” said the judges.