Actor’s Child Custody Case Highlights Sperm Donors and Paternity

A story in the news not too long ago drew considerable scrutiny from people when a judge ordered a sperm donor to pay child support for a child he fathered despite having an agreement stating he wasn’t responsible for the child. A recent case in California sheds a different light on the issue of paternity in sperm donor cases.

The recent case involved actor Jason Patric who has a four-year-old son. That little boy was conceived via in vitro fertilization in 2009. The boy’s mother claims Patric was nothing more than a sperm donor. Patric, however, asserts that he wants to be a part of the child’s life.

Initially, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge ruled against the actor and said that because the man wasn’t married to the boy’s mother when the child was conceived, and because they didn’t have a co-parenting agreement, he didn’t have parental rights. Recently, a California Appellate Court reversed that court’s ruling.

Up until the couple split for good in June of 2012, the boy’s mother reportedly encouraged the actor to have a father-son relationship with the boy. Sadly, the boy has been kept from his father for more than a year.

It doesn’t seem like this is going to be the end of this case. A trial is expected to resume to answer the question of the man’s paternal rights. An attorney representing the mother says that they are exploring their options and will soon make a decision about how to proceed. She says that they only want what is best for the child.

In the end, almost every parent wants what is best for the child. If you are involved in a child custody battle, knowing what options are available in your case might help you to decide how you want to proceed with your case.

Source: People.com, “Jason Patric Wins Appeal of Custody Ruling Over His Biological Child” Ken Lee, May. 14, 2014