{"id":28108,"date":"2024-07-27T04:34:36","date_gmt":"2024-07-27T08:34:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/worldjusticenews.com\/news\/?p=28108"},"modified":"2024-07-27T04:34:36","modified_gmt":"2024-07-27T08:34:36","slug":"woman-whose-wife-had-sex-with-sperm-donor-loses-legal-challenge-over-childs-birth-certificate","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/worldjusticenews.com\/news\/2024\/07\/27\/woman-whose-wife-had-sex-with-sperm-donor-loses-legal-challenge-over-childs-birth-certificate\/","title":{"rendered":"Woman whose wife had sex with sperm donor loses legal challenge over child’s birth certificate"},"content":{"rendered":"

A woman has lost a Court of Appeal challenge over her name being removed from her child’s birth certificate after it was revealed her ex-wife had sex with a sperm donor behind her back.<\/p>\n

The case concerned who the parents were of a now six-year-old born amid an “informal conception arrangement” between two women and a man, judges were told.<\/p>\n

The ex-couple, referred to as P and Q, met then-stranger F in a pub following an internet advert and “formed a favourable impression of him” before signing a sperm donor agreement over the use of artificial insemination.<\/p>\n

An “upset and depressed” P contacted the man for support after two failed attempts to make her pregnant, the court was told.<\/p>\n

P and F then had sex three times at P’s parents’ house, without Q’s knowledge, with the third occasion coinciding with another artificial insemination attempt.<\/p>\n

The child was conceived but judges said “it is impossible to know which method of insemination led to her conception”.<\/p>\n

P and Q later divorced amid disagreements over the care of the child.<\/p>\n

P then revealed what had happened and secured a court declaration earlier this year that F was the child’s legal parent.<\/p>\n

The case was a “cautionary tale” about the consequences of “deceit” and informal artificial insemination arrangements, Mrs Justice Gwynneth Knowles said.<\/p>\n

She concluded on the balance of probabilities that while Q had not consented to sex between P and F, the method of the child’s conception was “unclear”.<\/p>\n

It meant Q could not have parenthood under a law that grants it to the wives or civil partners of women who give birth via artificial insemination.<\/p>\n

‘A line must be drawn somewhere’<\/strong><\/p>\n

Q appealed the decision at a hearing in London this month, but in a written judgment on Friday, Lord Justice Peter Jackson said the challenge should be dismissed.<\/p>\n

Lawyers for Q argued it was for P to show the child was not conceived as a result of artificial insemination.<\/p>\n

P’s legal team said scientific testing showed F was the child’s genetic father, meaning the court had to declare paternity in his favour because it could not be proved that the law over artificial insemination applied.<\/p>\n

Lord Justice Peter Jackson said Q had not proved the legislation applied.<\/p>\n

He said the child existed “because P and Q wanted” a baby and F “was at that time no more than a means to an end”, adding: “It may therefore seem strange that [the child’s] parentage should be determined by the way in which [the child] was conceived, but in this area a line must be drawn somewhere.”<\/p>\n

Following a separate welfare hearing, a judge gave all three adults parental responsibility for the child, Lord Justice Peter Jackson said.<\/p>\n

Source: \u00a0\"Sky<\/a> news.sky.com<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A woman has lost a Court of Appeal challenge over her name being removed from her child’s birth certificate after it was revealed her ex-wife had sex with a sperm donor behind her back. The […]<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":10018,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"pmpro_default_level":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[2,14,4],"tags":[10539,3633,10540,4474],"class_list":{"0":"post-28108","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-news","8":"category-strange-news","9":"category-uk","10":"tag-artificial-insemination","11":"tag-paternity","12":"tag-sperm-donor","13":"tag-uk-court-of-appeal","14":"pmpro-has-access"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/worldjusticenews.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28108","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/worldjusticenews.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/worldjusticenews.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worldjusticenews.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worldjusticenews.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=28108"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/worldjusticenews.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28108\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":28109,"href":"https:\/\/worldjusticenews.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28108\/revisions\/28109"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worldjusticenews.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/10018"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worldjusticenews.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=28108"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worldjusticenews.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=28108"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worldjusticenews.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=28108"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}