Thursday, January 3, 2013
As I have previously discussed, William Marotta donated sperm to a lesbian couple, and he signed a contract with the couple excluding him from future financial responsibilities for the child. When the couple fell on difficult financial times they applied for welfare to help take care of the 3-year-old child. The state agency that handles that matter argued that Marotta should have pay for child support and the contract he signed was invalid because the couple and him failed to follow the proper procedure for donating sperm.
Now, Marotta has acknowledged that the case does scare him because of the financial implications of litigating the case. Though the attorneys that took his case are charging him reduced rates, Marotta does not have much more money to send on the case. In fact, he is sure that he will soon not have the funds to pay for his legal fees. Marotta is upset with decision to release his name but only at the state for forcing Schreiner to surrender his name. He claims that the decision to pursue him is politically motivated given that the case involves several key issues, including same-sex rights, adoption, and sperm donor rights. Marotta's claim is based on the fact that Kansas is a Republican state. He further argues that the policy adopted the state agency is harmful because it prevents men from deciding to become sperm donors at all. If a person wants to help Marotta in his defense, they can donate to his Legal Defense Fund here.
See Tim Hrenchir, Topeka Sperm Donor: Child Support Case Politically Motivated, The Capital-Journal, Dec. 31, 2012.
Special thanks to Brian Cohan (Attorney at Law, Law Offices of Brian J. Cohan, P.C.) for bringing this article to my attention.