But seriously, who is your daddy?

DIY sperm donation is a financially risky business. So says the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority after Andy Bathie was ordered to pay £400 per month in child support to his two biological offspring (see news reports here, here and here).

Andy donated sperm to a lesbian couple on the condition that he would not play any part in the parenting of the children. He explained that "These women wanted to be parents and take on the responsibilities that brings. I would never have agreed to this unless they had been a committed family. And now I can't afford to have children with my own wife - it's crippling me financially." The crux of Andy's problem is that he did not donate his sperm through a licensed fertility clinic. He is therefore not exempted from parental responsibility.

To add insult to injury, the non-biological mother bears no responsibility for the child’s maintenance. The House of Lords is presently discussing a Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill that would give equal responsibility to the non-biological parent. However, as Natalie Gamble, a fertility law expert explained to The Guardian: "Currently a non-birth mother in this situation is not automatically recognised as the parent in law, so she is not financially responsible. If the law being proposed was to apply in Andy's case, his responsibility for the child would be passed to the non-birth mother."

Is Andy Bathie a victim of the law not keeping up with social developments, or is he simply a victim of his own folly? Is the law as its stands logical and social development flawed? There certainly is an argument on either side of this issue. My view is that the law has some catching up to do in societies where non-traditional families are accepted, and that both society and the law have some catching up to do where non-traditional families are not accepted. Any other views?