Yes. Living in a society that is so over-sexualized, but wherein the mention of actual sex causes people to have strokes, is a ton of fun, let me tell you. =P
You can't sign away your rights to your child in the UK ever? Or just not voluntarily, to escape child support payments and the like? Because I'm pretty sure you can only sign them away here in the states if both parents agree, such as if the mother is getting re-married and the new husband wants to adopt the kids, while the biological father couldn't care less. I don't know for sure, mind you, but I imagine if you could just sign your parental rights away that easily, there'd be more people doing so to absolve their financial obligations.
Where was I going...oh, right. I'll have to read up on the Diane Blood case, but that one seems odd to me. There isn't the same issue with it as with this current case--since the husband was likely going to die, and then did so. It's not as if they can collect support from beyond the grave. I'm presuming that part of the issue with the current case was the issue of her later claiming support, although that might be a US-centric view on my part. From your comment, it sounds as if she wanted to use the embryos but didn't want him to have anything to do with the children, which blows the support theory out of the water. Also, a strong argument can be made that the ex-partner has a say in where his biological material goes. A guy in a coma, married to someone, not so much.
Right. I'm off to Google so I can perhaps sound smarter about such things later. *heh*
You can't sign away your rights to your child in the UK ever? Or just not voluntarily, to escape child support payments and the like? Because I'm pretty sure you can only sign them away here in the states if both parents agree, such as if the mother is getting re-married and the new husband wants to adopt the kids, while the biological father couldn't care less. I don't know for sure, mind you, but I imagine if you could just sign your parental rights away that easily, there'd be more people doing so to absolve their financial obligations.
Where was I going...oh, right. I'll have to read up on the Diane Blood case, but that one seems odd to me. There isn't the same issue with it as with this current case--since the husband was likely going to die, and then did so. It's not as if they can collect support from beyond the grave. I'm presuming that part of the issue with the current case was the issue of her later claiming support, although that might be a US-centric view on my part. From your comment, it sounds as if she wanted to use the embryos but didn't want him to have anything to do with the children, which blows the support theory out of the water. Also, a strong argument can be made that the ex-partner has a say in where his biological material goes. A guy in a coma, married to someone, not so much.
Right. I'm off to Google so I can perhaps sound smarter about such things later. *heh*
Reply
Leave a comment