Assisted reproduction ignores the best interests of the child

Jacob Szfranski, unwilling to be a father

Last week, a Chicago judge awarded custody of frozen embryos to Karla Dunston over the objection of her ex-boyfriend, Jacob Szfranski, who donated the sperm used to create the embryos with her ova. In 2010, 38 year old Dunston, a physician, learned she had cancer and treatment would render her sterile. After the embryos were created and frozen, Szafranski decided he did not want to be a father and sued for custody of the embryos.

A trial court ruled for Dunston based on the fact that her desire to be a mother outweighed his desire not to be a father. An appellate court reversed, holding, according to the Chicago Tribune, that "the case should be decided based on contracts and agreements between the two parties rather than just who has more compelling interest in the fate of the embryos." (emphasis added). On Friday, the trial court again awarded the embryos to Dunston. Szafranski said he will appeal again.

Jason Patric wins right to be a 'father'

Jason Patric--sperm donor and daddy

UPDATE: A California Appellate Court yesterday reversed a lower court which held that as a sperm donor, Jason Patric had no rights concerning his child--even though he was the only father the child had ever known. The Appellate Court sent the case back to the lower court to determine Patric's legal rights, The case is expected to resume at trial where it left off in February, 2013. In this case, common sense and the law converged. The post below was written before the decision, and it trumpets our belief than whenever possible, the rights of the biological parents of a child should be preserved--not only for the father and mother, but also for the health and well-being of the child. 
 ________________________