USE A SPERM BANK, LADIES

When we were in the process of conceiving our first child through IVF we were interviewed by a PhD candidate. She was comparing the experiences of lesbians who had kids by adopting, using alternative insemination or putting the eggs of one woman in the womb of the second.

One thing she told us is that every couple she interviewed who didn't use a sperm bank regretted it or had problems. Using a "friend" as a sperm donor sets lesbians up for big problems later on. This is different with egg donors because courts see two mothers and don't think a third mom is needed. But women without a man in charge of their lives are dangerous and deficient. Sperm donors are frequently awarded custody of the children of lesbians. If you don't want the hassles of divorce without the rights of marriage, use a sperm bank ladies.

"Sperm donor wins Irish custody battle

Thu Jul 19, 9:34 PM ET

SUMMARY: A lesbian couple wed in a U.K. civil union cannot take their 14-month-old boy to one mom's native Australia for long periods, the judge rules.

A man who donated his sperm to a lesbian couple won a legal fight Thursday to keep his biological son in Ireland.

The Supreme Court judgment was a first in Ireland, a predominantly Roman Catholic country where the rights of same-sex couples and sperm donors have not been spelled out. Now the couple, wed in a civil-union ceremony in England, cannot spend long periods in Australia with their 14-month-old boy as planned, but can only vacation there for up to six weeks.

Another courtroom battle between the man and the couple looms over joint custody of the boy.

Two judges, Justices Susan Denham and Joseph Finnegan, ruled that the toddler's best interests required him to stay in Ireland near his biological father. The third judge, Justice Nial Fennelly, disagreed, arguing no evidence was offered that the boy would be harmed by leaving Ireland.

"The case is utterly unique and unprecedented," Fennelly wrote in his dissent, noting that neither the parental rights of sperm donors nor lesbian couples are defined in Irish law.

Neither side has been publicly identified, following Ireland's policy of granting anonymity to family law litigants.

The lesbian couple -- an Irishwoman and an Australian -- exchanged vows in January 2006, just after same-sex civil unions were legalized in the United Kingdom. The Irishwoman was pregnant by the Irish sperm donor, who signed a contract giving him visitation rights.

The boy, born in May 2006, has his biological father's name as his middle name, and the couple initially granted the man regular visits. But tensions quickly grew, both sides' lawyers agreed.

The couple restricted the man's access to the boy, then announced they planned to go to Australia for up to a year. The man filed two lawsuits -- one to restrict the trip and another seeking joint custody. The custody case is to be heard this fall.

Thursday's verdict upheld a judgment by High Court Justice Henry Abbott, who ruled the couple could take the boy to Australia for six weeks. The Supreme Court held that until the custody claim is considered, the boy should travel outside Ireland for only a limited period. (Shawn Pogatchnik, AP) "

WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN

When women gain the right to control their reproduction or sexuality, repressive societies get scared. The response may be that of Islamic theocracies, where the government sanctions killing or gang-raping women as punishment for their, or their family members' infidelity.

In the United States, Christian theocrats seem to admire the Ayatollahs who dictate law and policy in countries like Iran. They are frightened to death of the fact that lesbians are creating healthy families without the participation of male parents.

In Kansas, a male friend agreed to donate sperm to a woman who wanted to have children as a single parent. They signed no contract giving him any rights whatsoever. His donation was made in a medical clinic. After the woman's twins were born, the man decided he wanted joint custody!

Below is my response to the article, entitled "What About the Children?"

"What about the children? The children have the right to an intact family of the parent(s) who chose to have them, NOT the confusion and chaos of shared custody with someone who happens to share their genes but is not a member of their family. With your logic, all parents who give their kids up for adoption should share custody with the adoptive parents. That is utterly wrong.

Infertile couples and their children created with the help of anonymous sperm donors have the legal right not to have a stranger interfere with their families.

You are suggesting that a family with an infertile husband who chose a sperm donor be forced to endure 18 years of interference by the "real" father.

Likewise, women who choose to have children without a male partner don't sign up for decades of "marriage" to a sperm donor either.

Oh, you only care if the parents are women. If you hate lesbians that much, don't pretend your concern is that the children have a "dad". The children's parents are the couple who is raising them, not a stranger who signed away his legal rights.

I donated my embryos left over from IVF to an infertile couple. My family does not expect the right to make decisions for those children or have legal visitation rights just because we helped another family have children. No donor has, or should have, that expectation. If the real parents who are raising the children wish to allow the donor and child to meet -- and most do -- that is their choice, not our right.

Children know their families are "real" whether or not their parents had help cretaing them. Why don't you know that?"