Post: #1

Pretty random question, hypothetical, and probably impractical: Has anyone heard of an unmarried couple signing a contract that states that the woman will never seek child support, no matter what happens? Would this contract be enforceable, valid? (In the US).

In this case, the two would raise the child together, and hopefully everything goes well. But if it doesn't, and they split, then the woman can never file for child support. This is the agreement they both agreed to, and the man would not have gotten her pregnant (inseminate her, etc.) if this agreement was not in place.

I keep finding that men can sign off their parental rights in certain cases, but this is different.

Post: #2

Nothing a woman signs is enforceable.

Post: #3

a) nothing you sign in advance of a child's birth is enforceable on either custody or child support

b) the court always takes the best interest of the child and doesn't (supposedly) consider the case for either parent. so whatever the situation is at the time of the custody hearing will be what the judge considers

Post: #4

Yikes, even a sperm donor can often times be forced to pay child support:

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read...ld-support

Post: #5

(01-13-2014 06:54 AM)AntiTrace Wrote:  Nothing a woman signs is enforceable.

Just like you can't believe anything a woman says.

Post: #6

http://www.theafa.org/article/using-a-kn...hallenges/

Interesting case below. States that a man who donated sperm and used a physician for the insemination, along with a written contract releasing him from child support and parental rights between the woman, actually won in court and did not have to pay chid support.

Quote:In a Pennsylvania case, the existence of a contract protected the donor from a claim for child support. In Ferguson v. McKiernan (2007), a friend who had previously been romantically involved with the mother provided semen to a clinic for her insemination. The donor and mother entered into a contract relieving him of any parental rights or responsibilities. Five years after the child’s birth, the mother sought child support. The lower court initially found in her favor, relying on the fairly universal rule that a contract to waive child support where the child is conceived through intercourse is not enforceable. However, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court reversed and ruled that the contract was enforceable. Although Pennsylvania does not have an AI statute clarifying the rights of donors and recipients, the court found no meaningful distinction between the circumstances of this insemination (using a physician, with a contract) and anonymous donation, where the donor would be protected from claims for support.

Conclusion: If there is a written agreement that no child support and no parental rights of the child, and that a licensed physician was used in the insemination, then the man would not owe child support, in Pennsylvania at least.

Post: #7

I was thinking a way around this, what if once the baby is born you get your parents to legally adopt it thus leading to the mother releasing rights to the child.

Old people love little children, you still raise the child with your parent's help (common in Asian cultures) and the child's mother loses her bargaining chip for custody/monetary support if things go south.

And to avoid civil union "marriage" laws, you get the girl to sign roommate lease agreement/contract.

Boom girl leaves, can claim civil union for alimony and because parents legally adopted the child she can't use the child as a tool for $$$

Post: #8

Child support belongs to the child, and the mother cannot waive the child's rights.

Post: #9

That's like me signing off on a contract saying it's OK for you to come and shoot up heroin at my place.

Might be OK with you and me, but state and federal law supersedes our contract.

I always laugh when I hear about people thinking they can create their own laws regarding child support. The court throws that stuff out so fast your head will be spinning. There is no free pass, unless you wanna disappear and live completely off the grid.

Post: #10

(01-13-2014 08:30 PM)BLarsen Wrote:  Child support belongs to the child, and the mother cannot waive the child's rights.

100% right. the problem is that the mother becomes the executor of those funds and is under no obligation to spend them in any proscribed way.

Post: #11

Well as I posted above, a Pennsylvania case showed that if you sign a written contract that a., you will sign off parental rights (with no child support), and b., the woman is inseminated by a licensed physician (i.e., you are donating your sperm to her), then you won't be liable for child support. But, then you aren't allowed to play a "role model" role for the child, and basically can't be around the child much.

Post: #12

If a man is not paying for the child, the state is. The state does not want to pay for the child, therefore, it will do everything it can to force a man to pay (See case of lesbian couple who had a known donor. The lesbian couple split, and fell on hard times. Since the father was known, the state forced him to pay, even though neither of the lesbian parents wanted him to.)

Post: #13

(01-16-2014 02:59 PM)trian1 Wrote:  If a man is not paying for the child, the state is. The state does not want to pay for the child, therefore, it will do everything it can to force a man to pay (See case of lesbian couple who had a known donor. The lesbian couple split, and fell on hard times. Since the father was known, the state forced him to pay, even though neither of the lesbian parents wanted him to.)

No, it was because the father didn't use a licensed physician to administer the sperm donation, and also because the father wanted to play the role model/father figure role for the child. So he ate the cake and wanted to have it, too. Don't work like that. If you want to be there for the child, in any way, then you're liable for child support. If you act as a "sperm donor" then it must be through a licensed physician and you can't have any role in the child's life.

Post: #14

In my fantasies I thought of a solution to this knowing that there is not way to contract away child support.

If the family were really rich and thought you were just grand, and daughter wanted your baby, could a spendthrift trust be set up to reimburse you if and only if any child support was ever demanded of you?

In other words, they say "We won't ever ask for child support. "
Of course, that's a contract that can't be enforced, so you get them to set up an irrevocable trust that will pay out to you the amount of child support should they ever renege on the deal and take you to court for child support.

Post: #15

Like previously stated, child support is the child's right, as is which parent gets custody. Nobody can contract away the child's rights.