53375
Post by: hotsauceman1
http://us.cnn.com/2014/10/02/us/sperm-bank-race-lawsuit/?cid=ob_articlesidebarall&iref=obnetwork
(CNN) -- At five months pregnant, Jennifer Cramblett and her same-sex partner, Amanda Zinkon, learned that Cramblett had been inseminated with the wrong sperm, and that the donor was of a different race.
Two years later, Cramblett and Zinkon are moms to a mixed race African-American girl named Payton, whom they love "unconditionally." But even that bond hasn't been enough to protect them from the emotional and social challenges they admittedly, were not prepared for.
"There are things I don't feel I have the background to even know. It is things we have to go out and research and talk to people and figure out how to do as simple as a daily chore of doing your hair," Cramblett told CNN.
Last week, Cramblett sued Midwest Sperm Bank with the goal to force them to change the policies that led to the mix-up and to obtain the funds her family needs to receive ongoing counseling and relocate to a more diverse community.
The mix-up
Cramblett said her "shock" came when she called Midwest Sperm Bank in April 2012 to secure more vials for a second pregnancy.
"When I called to order that sperm and the vials, I asked them for (donor) 380 and they came back on the line and said I do believe we have sent you donor number 330, are you sure that's not what you asked for?" said Cramblett.
"They came back on the line and then had asked me if I had requested an African-American donor. At that point, I said no, 380 was blond-haired, blue-eyed, resembling my partner, Amanda. They said we believe 330 is an African-American donor. We can no longer talk to you anymore," said Cramblett.
The mix-up stemmed from Midwest Sperm Bank's record-keeping procedures, according to a complaint filed in Circuit Court in Cook County, Illinois, where the company's main office is located. The sperm bank's records are kept manually, ink-on-paper, not electronically, according to the lawsuit.
"To the person who sent Jennifer vials of sperm in September, 2011, the number '380' looked like '330'," the complaint stated.
CNN called Midwest Sperm Bank. A woman who answered the phone and refused to identify herself said, "sorry, we have absolutely no comment."
CNN also reached out to the sperm bank's attorney, Marc Groedel, and received no response. Attorney Scott Bakal, listed on the complaint, hung up the phone with a quick "goodbye."
"The basis of the lawsuit and why we are doing what we are doing is so that somebody is held accountable. This isn't going to happen to anybody else," said Cramblett.
Utah university investigates suspected sperm switch
Lack of racial diversity in their town
With the birth of Payton, Cramblett and Zinkon were confronted with raising their mixed race child in Uniontown, Ohio, a rural community south of Akron that, according to the last census, is 98% white.
Cramblett suffers from "stress and anxiety" just thinking of Payton having to attend and all-white school and being "stigmatized or unrecognized."
"I want my child to be raised around people that maybe look like her, and unfortunately, we are not going to get all of those assets there in Uniontown, Ohio," she said. "We want her to grow up in a community where she feels accepted, feels like it's normal to be who she is."
But in spite of their strong wish to relocate, Cramblett and Zinkon don't have the financial means to do so, Cramblett's attorney Timothy Misny told CNN.
"Uniontown is a wonderful town, wonderful people, but there are no biracial children and no mixed marriages. We need to relocate Jennifer and her family to a town that offers that type of diverse culture," Misny said.
And since the sperm bank is responsible for the mix-up, the bank should be held financially accountable, said Misny.
"We are asking they change policy so it never happens again," Misny said. The lawsuit also seeks "compensation to receive the kind of counseling they will need going forward, and also to relocate to an area that is more demographically in tune with their family," he said.
"At times she (Cramblett) feels that she is underwater. She loves her child to death. But what she needs is assistance in handling it properly," Misny said.
Time-lapse video reveals secret life of an embryo, helps women conceive
Cramblett received a refund from the bank for the insemination vials she purchased, but the bank kept the payment for the insemination procedure.
In spite of the complicated legal means she has been forced to adopt, Cramblett said her daughter's future is what's really at stake.
"She's going to know what she is and where she came from and how all this happened. She's going to know that we love her unconditionally. Everybody around her loves her. So, I think she's going to know why we did what we did."
19370
Post by: daedalus
Hahahahahaha, wow. Not touching this with a 10 foot pole. The comments will be the most delicious things I've ever lapped up though.
91
Post by: Hordini
 hotsauceman1 wrote:
"I want my child to be raised around people that maybe look like her, and unfortunately, we are not going to get all of those assets there in Uniontown, Ohio," she said. "We want her to grow up in a community where she feels accepted, feels like it's normal to be who she is."
What is it with people's obsession for others to look like them? I've been hearing this more and more lately. It's fething psychotic.
27151
Post by: streamdragon
I've seen this article before and it's always easy to tell who actually takes the time to read, and who goes by the buzzwords in the write up.
53375
Post by: hotsauceman1
I read it, and I think it is stupid
27151
Post by: streamdragon
Then I question your reading comprehension skills.
Answer this:
For what legal reason is this woman suing?
77269
Post by: Raven911
I've often wondered how you can tell what they are giving you is the right stuff.
Legally, this will cost the lab big time.
However, the important thing is that the beautiful little girl is loved and accepted. Its not her fault and she shouldn't be shunned or punished for it. Hell, my wife and I will happily take her! At least they should get enough that her college is completely paid for!
79243
Post by: Swastakowey
UUGGGHHH. This happens to me all the time.
My boss sometimes writes his 8's so they look like 3's. Thousands of dollars of time wasted because of that going back and fixing things etc.
I now make a personal note to ensure that my 8's are 8's and 3's are 3's.
Make sure you do this, or you will suffer for it later. Always.
53375
Post by: hotsauceman1
For the mixup, which she was refunded for.
She is now asking money for therapy so she can deal with the thought of having a Biracial child in school and so she can relocate.
Its quite frankly a little racist, nothing has happened so far, and she is assuming the worse.
50512
Post by: Jihadin
 daedalus wrote:Hahahahahaha, wow. Not touching this with a 10 foot pole. The comments will be the most delicious things I've ever lapped up though.
Home Lawyers about the same as Barracks Lawyers 
65916
Post by: mitch_rifle
She has a pretty disugting attitude toward being bi-racial.
65199
Post by: OgreChubbs
Not the kids fault so don't get me wrong but I think this is just the problem with this type of scenario. She paid for a service was not happy and now there is a kid involved who is going to go through hell now.
At the end of the day poor kid... it always the kids who suffer when parents are donkey-caves.
27151
Post by: streamdragon
hotsauceman1 wrote:For the mixup, which she was refunded for.
She is now asking money for therapy so she can deal with the thought of having a Biracial child in school and so she can relocate.
Its quite frankly a little racist, nothing has happened so far, and she is assuming the worse.
*bzzzt* wrong
1. Refunding her the cost for other treatments doesn't undo the fact that the sperm bank frelled up big time. The suit is because they frelled up big time.
2. She has no issues (of her own) raising her biracial child. As the article states, she and her (lesbian) partner both love their daughter. The issue is that her small town is essentially 100% white and makes openly racist remarks, including people in her own family. She wants to move to a place where her daughter doesn't have to put up with that growing up.
Other than her family, there is no racist slant to the actual story presented. She is suing because the sperm bank she had a contract with frelled up.
Not because she doesn't love her daughter.
Not because her daughter is part black.
Not because she is racist.
Edit: Second article on the subject: http://www.nbcnews.com/health/womens-health/black-donor-sperm-mistakenly-sent-white-mom-jennifer-cramblett-suit-n215801
50512
Post by: Jihadin
2. She has no issues (of her own) raising her biracial child. As the article states, she and her (Same Sex) partner both love their daughter. The issue is that her small town is essentially 100% white and makes openly racist remarks, including people in her own family. She wants to move to a place where her daughter doesn't have to put up with that growing up.
Fixed 
27151
Post by: streamdragon
Raven911 wrote:However, the important thing is that the beautiful little girl is loved and accepted.
mitch_rifle wrote:She has a pretty disugting attitude toward being bi-racial.
OgreChubbs wrote:At the end of the day poor kid... it always the kids who suffer when parents are donkey-caves.
Just to be clear, both of this girl's mothers love her dearly. Automatically Appended Next Post:  Jihadin wrote:2. She has no issues (of her own) raising her biracial child. As the article states, she and her (Same Sex) partner both love their daughter. The issue is that her small town is essentially 100% white and makes openly racist remarks, including people in her own family. She wants to move to a place where her daughter doesn't have to put up with that growing up.
Fixed
Er... is lesbian considered a bad word now or something? Honest question.
50512
Post by: Jihadin
Er... is lesbian considered a bad word now or something? Honest question.
Just helping you be safe. Just don't want anyone turning this into a God, Religion, or something stupid thread
38860
Post by: MrDwhitey
You of course know you're doing that by doing what you did. It'd be best if you stopped.
Sperm bank fethed up big time, this kids life would be pretty unpleasant it seems in the area they are in, so frankly just by that I'd be happy with the Sperm bank paying relocation costs.
37231
Post by: d-usa
 Hordini wrote: hotsauceman1 wrote:
"I want my child to be raised around people that maybe look like her, and unfortunately, we are not going to get all of those assets there in Uniontown, Ohio," she said. "We want her to grow up in a community where she feels accepted, feels like it's normal to be who she is."
What is it with people's obsession for others to look like them? I've been hearing this more and more lately. It's fething psychotic.
Besides the whole "not wanting her to be around people who will treat her different because of her race" thing, tt has to do with your heritage, your history, your background, where you came from, what people before you have done.
Let's say you got a job in another country. I'm just going to assume that you are white, so I will make the scenario that you and a white wife with white children are moving to Germany for a job. You are a white family living in another country that is still majority white, so we don't even have to worry about race yet. So just an American white family, trying to raise an American white child, in white Germany.
Would you have the mindset that your child is now surrounded by Germans so you are going to teach him German heritage, German language, German History, German Traditions, and ignore his American heritage? Or are you going to teach him his cultural heritage as an American? Maybe see if there is a group of Expats that meets and does regular activities with their American Children? Would you make sure that you raise your child in a way that makes sure he knows where he came from, what his history is, what his culture is, while at the same time also integrating him into the culture that is different than where you guys came from?
I have a biracial child, and that is one of the things we are addressing as she gets older. I will make sure she understands her German heritage, my wife will make sure she understands her African-American heritage, together we are making sure that she is a well adjusted indivual in a diverse world who knows where she came from, where she is right now, and all the places she can be in the future.
121
Post by: Relapse
The thing I am trying to wrap my brain around is how it is that she is worried that this town and family that apparently accepts
a same sex with kids living arrangement gets all uptight over a bi racial child.
I am thinking we don't have the whole story here, especially with a comment like this from her lawyer that makes the whole case for moving seem like weak sauce:
"But in spite of their strong wish to relocate, Cramblett and Zinkon don't have the financial means to do so, Cramblett's attorney Timothy Misny told CNN.
"Uniontown is a wonderful town, wonderful people, but there are no biracial children and no mixed marriages. We need to relocate Jennifer and her family to a town that offers that type of diverse culture," Misny said."
If the lab screwed up, they should be liable, but there are elements we aren't getting here.
58873
Post by: BobtheInquisitor
Well, they aren't exactly going to make a public statement like, "This is a terrible town full of bigots and sociopaths" while they are still living there. And I have met people who are okay with LGBT rights of all kinds, but cross the street when they see someone darker walking their way.
121
Post by: Relapse
 BobtheInquisitor wrote:Well, they aren't exactly going to make a public statement like, "This is a terrible town full of bigots and sociopaths" while they are still living there. And I have met people who are okay with LGBT rights of all kinds, but cross the street when they see someone darker walking their way.
I've lived in the midwest farming area and I have seen it the opposite to your experience. I really don't believe we have the whole story.
5534
Post by: dogma
Relapse wrote:
If the lab screwed up, they should be liable, but there are elements we aren't getting here.
Given that the lab admitted making an error I think we can safely conclude that it did, whether or not it is liable depends on the nature of contract the woman signed. Given this, I suspect the emphasis the child's race and the the desire to relocate is intended to be an appeal to emotion designed to increase the amount awarded in the event of a favorable judgment.
121
Post by: Relapse
 dogma wrote:Relapse wrote:
If the lab screwed up, they should be liable, but there are elements we aren't getting here.
Given that the lab admitted making an error I think we can safely conclude that it did, whether or not it is liable depends on the nature of contract the woman signed. Given this, I suspect the emphasis the child's race and the the desire to relocate is intended to be an appeal to emotion designed to increase the amount awarded in the event of a favorable judgment.
Agreed
15594
Post by: Albatross
I wonder if they'll tell their daughter this story.
91
Post by: Hordini
 d-usa wrote: Hordini wrote: hotsauceman1 wrote:
"I want my child to be raised around people that maybe look like her, and unfortunately, we are not going to get all of those assets there in Uniontown, Ohio," she said. "We want her to grow up in a community where she feels accepted, feels like it's normal to be who she is."
What is it with people's obsession for others to look like them? I've been hearing this more and more lately. It's fething psychotic.
Besides the whole "not wanting her to be around people who will treat her different because of her race" thing, tt has to do with your heritage, your history, your background, where you came from, what people before you have done.
Let's say you got a job in another country. I'm just going to assume that you are white, so I will make the scenario that you and a white wife with white children are moving to Germany for a job. You are a white family living in another country that is still majority white, so we don't even have to worry about race yet. So just an American white family, trying to raise an American white child, in white Germany.
Would you have the mindset that your child is now surrounded by Germans so you are going to teach him German heritage, German language, German History, German Traditions, and ignore his American heritage? Or are you going to teach him his cultural heritage as an American? Maybe see if there is a group of Expats that meets and does regular activities with their American Children? Would you make sure that you raise your child in a way that makes sure he knows where he came from, what his history is, what his culture is, while at the same time also integrating him into the culture that is different than where you guys came from?
I have a biracial child, and that is one of the things we are addressing as she gets older. I will make sure she understands her German heritage, my wife will make sure she understands her African-American heritage, together we are making sure that she is a well adjusted indivual in a diverse world who knows where she came from, where she is right now, and all the places she can be in the future.
As someone who speaks German and has lived and worked in Germany, I suppose that is a good example. 
To answer your question, of course I would teach my child about his or her American heritage, and would make sure they learned English, but I would most especially make damn sure that they learned the German language and culture as well. But I'll do my best to teach any children I have the German language and culture even if they're born in the US.
But none of that has anything to do with how my child looks. Wherever I was at, I would want my child to have good role models and good friends and be around people who care about them. If we live in Germany and most of those role models are white, as long as they're good role models, good friends, and care about them, that's fine. If we live in Egypt and most of their role models and friends are Egyptian, I don't care if they're not white (even though some Egyptians are white), as long as they're good role models, good friends, etc., that's what's important to me. If we live in Japan, same thing. I don't care if everyone my child is raised around looks different than they do, as long as they are cared for.
Now, if these women want to move because they feel like their child will not be loved and cared for in that environment, that is perfectly, 100% reasonable. But the comment that they want the child to grow up around people who look like her, is, to me, the wrong priority. What they said, "I want my child to be raised around people that maybe look like her," and how you phrased it: "not wanting her to be around people who will treat her different because of her race," are not the same thing. How you phrased it is perfectly reasonable and I completely agree with you, but that's not the quote that I'm referring to.
37231
Post by: d-usa
Hordini wrote:
Now, if these women want to move because they feel like their child will not be loved and cared for in that environment, that is perfectly, 100% reasonable. But the comment that they want the child to grow up around people who look like her, is, to me, the wrong priority. What they said, "I want my child to be raised around people that maybe look like her," and how you phrased it: "not wanting her to be around people who will treat her different because of her race," are not the same thing. How you phrased it is perfectly reasonable and I completely agree with you, but that's not the quote that I'm referring to.
I would agree, but I also wonder if it is just bad phrasing on their part.
I know even if I were to raise my child by myself, I would still want her to learn her black heritage. I could teach her everthing I know about it, but I wouldn't have "lived it" and I could imagine that I would feel like a bit of a phony if I were to try to relate with her when it comes to being black. Which is why I'm glad that my wife is still around.
My take on their statement might also be clouded by an interview I listened to a few months ago on NPR. They were talking to a white couple who have adopted two daughters who are black. They had some of the same thoughts that I have: how do we teach them about their history, how do we prepare them for what it can be like to grow up black and to be black, how can we make sure that they understand their heritage. They knew that they could teach the heritage and culture, but that they could never teach and share the experience of being black. One thing they did was to make sure that their daughters spend routine time with a black lady that they knew from their church (basically a new "aunt") to serve as a mentor in an area that they knew they could never truly teach her. They wanted their daughters to know other black people to know and share that part of their heritage. That interview came to mind when I read the "I want my child to be raised around people that maybe look like her", so I probably took it a little different than you.
35843
Post by: Peter Wiggin
They can't figure out black people hair!
Sounds like this multi-racial same sex parent family needs some funds for more diversity counseling.
Which is why they're suing I guess.
42144
Post by: cincydooley
 Peter Wiggin wrote:They can't figure out black people hair!
Sounds like this multi-racial same sex parent family needs some funds for more diversity counseling.
Which is why they're suing I guess.
Well, no. They're suing because she was effectively "raped" by the sperm bank.
She consented to being impregnated by a blue eyed white dude, not a black dude.
514
Post by: Orlanth
Hordini wrote:
What is it with people's obsession for others to look like them? I've been hearing this more and more lately. It's fething psychotic.
It is a perfectly natural sentiment to want to breed within your own ethnic group.
It's alarming that some people would want to write that off as a mental illness or racism.
121
Post by: Relapse
 cincydooley wrote: Peter Wiggin wrote:They can't figure out black people hair!
Sounds like this multi-racial same sex parent family needs some funds for more diversity counseling.
Which is why they're suing I guess.
Well, no. They're suing because she was effectively "raped" by the sperm bank.
She consented to being impregnated by a blue eyed white dude, not a black dude.
Two years down the road from the incident. A lot in her story does not add up.
90117
Post by: Kali
Relapse wrote:Two years down the road from the incident. A lot in her story does not add up.
Lawsuits are almost always preceded by informal negotiation and then arbitration, processes which can take years. Not to mention the fact that there's obviously a definite stigma and a lot of negative pressure attached to suing a place for giving you your daughter...
Either way, the lab fethed up big time and she deserves compensation for that.
53375
Post by: hotsauceman1
And they refunded her for the mistake.
I mean, she is happy with her daughter, what is the big deal? If "Everyone Loves her" then why is there a problem?
121
Post by: Relapse
 Kali wrote:Relapse wrote:Two years down the road from the incident. A lot in her story does not add up.
Lawsuits are almost always preceded by informal negotiation and then arbitration, processes which can take years. Not to mention the fact that there's obviously a definite stigma and a lot of negative pressure attached to suing a place for giving you your daughter...
Either way, the lab fethed up big time and she deserves compensation for that.
I'm not saying the lab didn't screw up, I don't know really much from the article though, except her side of the story, and it leaves many questions with the fragment we have.
221
Post by: Frazzled
daedalus wrote:Hahahahahaha, wow. Not touching this with a 10 foot pole. The comments will be the most delicious things I've ever lapped up though.
Agreed.  Automatically Appended Next Post: OgreChubbs wrote:Not the kids fault so don't get me wrong but I think this is just the problem with this type of scenario. She paid for a service was not happy and now there is a kid involved who is going to go through hell now.
At the end of the day poor kid... it always the kids who suffer when parents are donkey-caves.
wait, how exactly is the child going to go through "hell?" I may be misperceiving what you're typing. Automatically Appended Next Post: Relapse wrote: dogma wrote:Relapse wrote:
If the lab screwed up, they should be liable, but there are elements we aren't getting here.
Given that the lab admitted making an error I think we can safely conclude that it did, whether or not it is liable depends on the nature of contract the woman signed. Given this, I suspect the emphasis the child's race and the the desire to relocate is intended to be an appeal to emotion designed to increase the amount awarded in the event of a favorable judgment.
Agreed
Bank shot on that agreement.
514
Post by: Orlanth
 Frazzled wrote:
wait, how exactly is the child going to go through "hell?" I may be misperceiving what you're typing.
Only guessing here, but from experience of mixed race friends they mentioned not fitting in with either black or white communities as children. Children are very tribalistic more so than adults and integration is largely a dream.
Adult society can be better but that depends on the society.
27151
Post by: streamdragon
hotsauceman1 wrote:And they refunded her for the mistake.
I mean, she is happy with her daughter, what is the big deal? If "Everyone Loves her" then why is there a problem?
Because breach of contract is a thing? They gave her money back for the other vials of the wrong stuff. They have done 0 to compensate her for their frell up. How hard is that to understand? Automatically Appended Next Post: Relapse wrote: Kali wrote:Relapse wrote:Two years down the road from the incident. A lot in her story does not add up.
Lawsuits are almost always preceded by informal negotiation and then arbitration, processes which can take years. Not to mention the fact that there's obviously a definite stigma and a lot of negative pressure attached to suing a place for giving you your daughter...
Either way, the lab fethed up big time and she deserves compensation for that.
I'm not saying the lab didn't screw up, I don't know really much from the article though, except her side of the story, and it leaves many questions with the fragment we have.
Out of curiosity, what questions remain?
12313
Post by: Ouze
 streamdragon wrote: hotsauceman1 wrote:And they refunded her for the mistake.
I mean, she is happy with her daughter, what is the big deal? If "Everyone Loves her" then why is there a problem?
Because breach of contract is a thing? They gave her money back for the other vials of the wrong stuff. They have done 0 to compensate her for their frell up. How hard is that to understand?
And didn't even refund the actual insemination (with the wrong semen) so... not even half a point, really.
To use an analogy, if I offer to wash your windows for $10, and then I accidentally smash some of them through incompetence, would you be OK if I agreed to give you a $5 refund, HSM?
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
 Orlanth wrote: Hordini wrote:
What is it with people's obsession for others to look like them? I've been hearing this more and more lately. It's fething psychotic.
It is a perfectly natural sentiment to want to breed within your own ethnic group.
It's alarming that some people would want to write that off as a mental illness or racism.
We don't know that at all. Most people "breed" within their own ethnic group because that is the most easily available choice.
The wider availability of choice in the modern world is being matched in many cases -- the UK is a leader -- by increased numbers of what I will term mixed marriages and "haafu" (to borrow a Japanese term) children.
10920
Post by: Goliath
streamdragon wrote: hotsauceman1 wrote:And they refunded her for the mistake.
I mean, she is happy with her daughter, what is the big deal? If "Everyone Loves her" then why is there a problem?
Because breach of contract is a thing? They gave her money back for the other vials of the wrong stuff. They have done 0 to compensate her for their frell up. How hard is that to understand?
It's okay though, because a cock-up of this magnitude is obviously of the same level as getting anchovies on your pizza when you ordered pepperoni, so they should be okay with a simple refund.
10312
Post by: LuciusAR
I think they have a perfectly legitimate grievance. They selected donor a, the clinic messed up and gave them the sperm of donor b.
The race aspect of this case is a massive red herring. It's not about the baby being black (though that did make it easy to identity that an error had been made) it's that the clinic was grossly negligent. How many other times have they done this and it's gone unnoticed because the wrong donor was the same race as the right one?
91
Post by: Hordini
Orlanth wrote: Hordini wrote:
What is it with people's obsession for others to look like them? I've been hearing this more and more lately. It's fething psychotic.
It is a perfectly natural sentiment to want to breed within your own ethnic group.
It's alarming that some people would want to write that off as a mental illness or racism.
If you read her her quote and the rest of my post, it's not about breeding, as you put it, it's about raising.
514
Post by: Orlanth
 Kilkrazy wrote: Orlanth wrote: Hordini wrote:
What is it with people's obsession for others to look like them? I've been hearing this more and more lately. It's fething psychotic.
It is a perfectly natural sentiment to want to breed within your own ethnic group.
It's alarming that some people would want to write that off as a mental illness or racism.
We don't know that at all. Most people "breed" within their own ethnic group because that is the most easily available choice.
The wider availability of choice in the modern world is being matched in many cases -- the UK is a leader -- by increased numbers of what I will term mixed marriages and "haafu" (to borrow a Japanese term) children.
Number of mixed race children is 2.9% of the total. However the UK has 13% ethnic population. Thus the majority stick within their own racial group, this includes ethnic population as well as white. Approx 90% choose a partner of same racial group.
This number is a growth rend but is nevertheless a minority.
Also there is nothing wrong in wanting to prefer a partner of the same racial background, it is not discrimination or racism.
83381
Post by: Hive Fleet Cerberus
I really, really wanted this to be what the buzzwords suggested it'd be.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
I am sure the methodology of the study was first rate. Automatically Appended Next Post: Orlanth wrote: Kilkrazy wrote: Orlanth wrote: Hordini wrote:
What is it with people's obsession for others to look like them? I've been hearing this more and more lately. It's fething psychotic.
It is a perfectly natural sentiment to want to breed within your own ethnic group.
It's alarming that some people would want to write that off as a mental illness or racism.
We don't know that at all. Most people "breed" within their own ethnic group because that is the most easily available choice.
The wider availability of choice in the modern world is being matched in many cases -- the UK is a leader -- by increased numbers of what I will term mixed marriages and "haafu" (to borrow a Japanese term) children.
Number of mixed race children is 2.9% of the total. However the UK has 13% ethnic population. Thus the majority stick within their own racial group, this includes ethnic population as well as white. Approx 90% choose a partner of same racial group.
This number is a growth rend but is nevertheless a minority.
Also there is nothing wrong in wanting to prefer a partner of the same racial background, it is not discrimination or racism.
You can only have a mixed race baby from an ethnic minority parent. The proportion of mixed race babies is 2.9 / 13 = 22% chance of an ethnic minority parent having a mixed baby. This suggests that 1 in 5 marriages of ethnic minority people are outside their racial group.
Whilst a minority it is a significant proportion and is known to be growing. It is also known that the ethnic diversity of the UK has been growing. These trends are certainly linked.
7361
Post by: Howard A Treesong
If you live in the sort of town that reacts negatively to a mixed race child I assume that having same-sex parents doesn't lend itself to an easy ride. Even if the child were white, they'd always be that one with the gay parents.
Still the clinc screwed up badly, they still mixed up samples and I seminars soneone with the wrong one. There's a significant grievance there. I'm surprised that such a process can go wrong because someone misreads the handwriting on a request. Surely there would be more checks in place than that?
90117
Post by: Kali
Well yeah it's as solid as that sort of research gets, but if you have specific grievances with it I'll respond to them as best I can. It's not like these results are unexpected.
121
Post by: Relapse
 Howard A Treesong wrote:If you live in the sort of town that reacts negatively to a mixed race child I assume that having same-sex parents doesn't lend itself to an easy ride. Even if the child were white, they'd always be that one with the gay parents.
Still the clinc screwed up badly, they still mixed up samples and I seminars soneone with the wrong one. There's a significant grievance there. I'm surprised that such a process can go wrong because someone misreads the handwriting on a request. Surely there would be more checks in place than that?
That was the thing that had me from the first. They'd apparently been living in this town from before they had the baby and for two years after that. There was no complaint about people being down on them for being a same sex couple, either in the town or from their family. Now, all of a sudden, they are hearing things about their bi racial baby? Something isn't adding up here. True, the clinic is at fault and owes them something, but I think Dogma called it right in his post. They are playing angles to get a bigger settlement.
12313
Post by: Ouze
And if that's the case - good for them. A screwup of this magnitude deserves to be punished harshly by a jury.
67730
Post by: stanman
A lot of times a suit is used to impose financial burden on a company/party as an incentive for them not to repeat the same mistakes in the future. Just refunding the person the money they paid often isn't enough of to cause them to rethink their policies or procedures.
For example if a customer buys a hamburger at a fast food place and they get sick from it the food places simply refunds their $5 and carries on as usual. Not if that same customer gets sick and instead ends up incurring the costs of a hospital stay and then sues the fast food place for thousands of dollars in damages it's far more likely to prompt a change in how that places handles the food in the future.
Simply because the sperm bank refunded their payment doesn't fix the fact that a massive mistake was made, a child isn't something you can just exchange when it comes out different then expected. Children are both a massive expense and investment of time and care, so the criteria of who you want to father/mother your child is usually pretty damn important and that got fethed up. Rather than going and shacking up with random Joe Blow they specifically go to these facilities and pay a lot of money because they are expecting the donors to be screened and have accurate information presented to them so they can make the best selection and pairing based on what they desire in their future children and that trust was violated by their incompetence.
It has a huge and permanent impact on the lives of the parents as well as the life of their child which is why it runs so much deeper then just getting a simple refund.
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
Relapse wrote: Howard A Treesong wrote:If you live in the sort of town that reacts negatively to a mixed race child I assume that having same-sex parents doesn't lend itself to an easy ride. Even if the child were white, they'd always be that one with the gay parents.
Still the clinc screwed up badly, they still mixed up samples and I seminars soneone with the wrong one. There's a significant grievance there. I'm surprised that such a process can go wrong because someone misreads the handwriting on a request. Surely there would be more checks in place than that?
That was the thing that had me from the first. They'd apparently been living in this town from before they had the baby and for two years after that. There was no complaint about people being down on them for being a same sex couple, either in the town or from their family. Now, all of a sudden, they are hearing things about their bi racial baby? Something isn't adding up here. True, the clinic is at fault and owes them something, but I think Dogma called it right in his post. They are playing angles to get a bigger settlement.
Indeed. Thats why I think the claim is BS.
I think if people didn't have an issue with the Gay couple they wouldn't care about the bi-racial baby.
42144
Post by: cincydooley
 stanman wrote:
It has a huge and permanent impact on the lives of the parents as well as the life of their child which is why it runs so much deeper then just getting a simple refund.
.
Yeup.
I'm all against frivolous lawsuits (which is why, despite having had a significant amount of Red Bull, I won't be filing for my $10).
To me, this is the antithesis of a frivolous lawsuit.
In my opinion, this should be the kind of mistake that shuts a sperm bank down.
12313
Post by: Ouze
cincydooley wrote:I'm all against frivolous lawsuits (which is why, despite having had a significant amount of Red Bull, I won't be filing for my $10)..
1.) Is anyone "for" frivolous lawsuits?
2.) The Red Bull lawsuit is not frivolous. but it's pretty poorly reported, so you have to dig into it a bit to learn that.
30287
Post by: Bromsy
 Ouze wrote: cincydooley wrote:I'm all against frivolous lawsuits (which is why, despite having had a significant amount of Red Bull, I won't be filing for my $10)..
1.) Is anyone "for" frivolous lawsuits?
...Lawyers?
34390
Post by: whembly
 Bromsy wrote: Ouze wrote: cincydooley wrote:I'm all against frivolous lawsuits (which is why, despite having had a significant amount of Red Bull, I won't be filing for my $10)..
1.) Is anyone "for" frivolous lawsuits?
...Lawyers?
snort... took the words outta my mouph.
42144
Post by: cincydooley
You know, the title of this thread really should be changed to "Woman Sues Sperm Bank for giving her WRONG baby"
37231
Post by: d-usa
cincydooley wrote:You know, the title of this thread really should be changed to "Woman Sues Sperm Bank for giving her WRONG baby"
But clickbait!
53375
Post by: hotsauceman1
No, the suit claims racial reasons for the compensation and hardship. like going to a black barbershop or wanting to leave a town that seems to be ok with a same sex couple, but not a Biracial baby
42144
Post by: cincydooley
hotsauceman1 wrote:No, the suit claims racial reasons for the compensation and hardship. like going to a black barbershop or wanting to leave a town that seems to be ok with a same sex couple, but not a Biracial baby
Or not:
Cramblett said she decided to sue to prevent the sperm bank from making the same mistake again. The lawsuit says the sperm bank has no electronic record-keeping and no quality controls that would have prevented it from sending the wrong sperm to fertility clinics.
and
Jennifer Cramblett of Uniontown, Ohio, is seeking more than $50,000 in damages from Midwest Sperm Bank in Downer's Grover, Ill., in a suit she insists is not about race. She claims she chose a white man's sperm so that the baby would look like her partner, Amanda Zinkon, but due to a clerical mix-up, she received an African-American man's sperm.
53375
Post by: hotsauceman1
But part of the reason is that it is about race
Lack of racial diversity in their town
With the birth of Payton, Cramblett and Zinkon were confronted with raising their mixed race child in Uniontown, Ohio, a rural community south of Akron that, according to the last census, is 98% white.
Cramblett suffers from "stress and anxiety" just thinking of Payton having to attend and all-white school and being "stigmatized or unrecognized."
42144
Post by: cincydooley
You can twist it any way you want, but the simple fact is that you're wrong. Their suit has nothing to do with race, per them. But I do appreciate how you're claiming it is, despite what the pursuant couple says.
And quite frankly, were I them, I'd be suing for a whole lot more than $50K.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm sure I must be wrong though, because me and my two degrees hates universities and stuff.
53375
Post by: hotsauceman1
cincydooley wrote:You can twist it any way you want, but the simple fact is that you're wrong. Their suit has nothing to do with race, per them. But I do appreciate how you're claiming it is, despite what the pursuant couple says.
And quite frankly, were I them, I'd be suing for a whole lot more than $50K.
Yes, because if they say it isnt about race, it totally isnt about race.
She claimed the reason she wants the money is to move out of the town and Counseling for anxiety and fears over raising a Bi-racial child
37231
Post by: d-usa
hotsauceman1 wrote: cincydooley wrote:You can twist it any way you want, but the simple fact is that you're wrong. Their suit has nothing to do with race, per them. But I do appreciate how you're claiming it is, despite what the pursuant couple says.
And quite frankly, were I them, I'd be suing for a whole lot more than $50K.
Yes, because if they say it isnt about race, it totally isnt about race.
She claimed the reason she wants the money is to move out of the town and Counseling for anxiety and fears over raising a Bi-racial child
Which wouldn't have happened if they didn't get the wrong sperm and therefore the wrong baby.
Which wouldn't have happened if they had better record keeping.
Which is why the suit was filed so that it can be fixed.
Race can be a factor for determining damages, but it's not the core reason for the suit.
42144
Post by: cincydooley
hotsauceman1 wrote:
Yes, because if they say it isnt about race, it totally isnt about race.
She claimed the reason she wants the money is to move out of the town and Counseling for anxiety and fears over raising a Bi-racial child
Well I'm glad you're the arbiter of the intentions of others. This is great to know.
Regardless, it doesn't fething matter.
The sperm-bank made an EGREGIOUS error.
They should be held accountable to the utmost. And she should be awarded a SUBSTANTIAL sum. Well over the paltry $50K they're asking. And the Sperm Bank should probably lose their license.
53375
Post by: hotsauceman1
Then why did she bring race into it? Why not just say "They gave me the wrong sperm"
42144
Post by: cincydooley
hotsauceman1 wrote:Then why did she bring race into it? Why not just say "They gave me the wrong sperm"
Because in this instance the race is the very obvious signpost that the sperm bank fethed up. Who's to say they haven't fethed up before and people just don't know because both donors were white?
I mean, this is some pretty simple A-->B critical thinking.
53375
Post by: hotsauceman1
I dont think it is. This case would not even have made it to the News would not have picked it up. I think what she is doing and why she is asking for does come down to race.
37231
Post by: d-usa
hotsauceman1 wrote:Then why did she bring race into it? Why not just say "They gave me the wrong sperm"
Because mistakes can be worse based on certain circumstances. But that doesn't change what the basic mistake was. Automatically Appended Next Post: It's like suing somebody that hit your car while they were drunk. That's what you are suing them for: driving while drunk and hitting you and injuring you.
Let's say that the car accident resulted in a lot of damage to both your arms, and now you can no longer work. You can no longer play sports. Heck, you can't even masturbate anymore.
So when you file the lawsuit you list all those as reasons why the damages should be higher: because losing your arms impacts you that much. But that doesn't change the reason for the actual suit: you hit me with your car while drunk.
The fancy headline would be "guy sues because he can't masturbate anymore", but the headline would be wrong.
67730
Post by: stanman
hotsauceman1 wrote:Then why did she bring race into it? Why not just say "They gave me the wrong sperm"
I doubt she wrote her own headline.
The mixed race of the baby made it plainly obvious there'd been a mix up. Local and national news likely picked up the story and said hey lets drop race into the headline as it gets people riled up and that sells paper and gets ratings.
Same issue could occur if a person went to a sperm bank and made a clear request that the donor have a family history free of heart disease, and the baby is born with a hereditary heart issue
because the bank mixed up donor with one who had a known condition that they specifically requested to avoid. Or if they went to the clinic requesting for a donor of above average intelligence but instead got sperm from somebody that suffered from acute metal retardation. Not what you wanted nor requested and unlike most other purchases it creates a lifelong complication for both of the parents and the child as well.
Sure you can still love the child, but it comes with a lot of additional issues that you didn't consent to and had forced upon you.
121
Post by: Relapse
I think everyone here is in agreement that these women are owed buckets of cask and that sperm bank needs to do a serious overhaul of their system.
I would like to know more about this town, though.
Looks like a decent enough place to live:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniontown,_Ohio
67730
Post by: stanman
Could you imagine the horror if somebody were to go to a sperm bank and had a ginger kid on accident? 
53375
Post by: hotsauceman1
"Women Sues sperm bank for Souless Baby""
68355
Post by: easysauce
hotsauceman1 wrote: cincydooley wrote:You can twist it any way you want, but the simple fact is that you're wrong. Their suit has nothing to do with race, per them. But I do appreciate how you're claiming it is, despite what the pursuant couple says.
And quite frankly, were I them, I'd be suing for a whole lot more than $50K.
Yes, because if they say it isnt about race, it totally isnt about race.
She claimed the reason she wants the money is to move out of the town and Counseling for anxiety and fears over raising a Bi-racial child
suing for damages over a monumental cock-up like giving someone the wrong sperm isnt really out of line, the amount being up to the courts to decide.
Had it been a black couple, who asked for black donor sperm, and received white sperm, and had a white baby, you bet they have every recourse to sue the bank.
A black couple could also find the surrounding community was bigoted and treated them and/or their child differently because of race, and add that to an exhaustive list of damages, and trust me when you list damages to sue for, you include every single itty bitty thing.
IE someone burns down your house, you sue them for every pen and stamp you had in there.
its not like a hamburger with pickles on it when you asked for none, a simple refund or do-over does not bring everyone back to where they started.
OFC big media says its all about race, so it must be more of whitey keeping everyone down, because that sells papers and shocks people more.
*edit for sp clarity
53375
Post by: hotsauceman1
 easysauce wrote: hotsauceman1 wrote: cincydooley wrote:You can twist it any way you want, but the simple fact is that you're wrong. Their suit has nothing to do with race, per them. But I do appreciate how you're claiming it is, despite what the pursuant couple says.
And quite frankly, were I them, I'd be suing for a whole lot more than $50K.
Yes, because if they say it isnt about race, it totally isnt about race.
She claimed the reason she wants the money is to move out of the town and Counseling for anxiety and fears over raising a Bi-racial child
suing for damages over a monumental cock-up like giving someone the wrong sperm isnt really out of line, the amount being up to the courts to decide.
Had it been a black couple, who asked for black donor sperm, and received white sperm, and had a white baby, you bet they have every recourse to sue the bank.
A black couple could also find the surrounding community was bigoted and treated them and/or their child differently because of race, and add that to an exhaustive list of damages, and trust me when you list damages to sue for, you include every single itty bitty thing.
I guess I could still see it that way. I just dont get how she is having anxiety raising a Bi-racial baby
67730
Post by: stanman
hotsauceman1 wrote:I guess I could still see it that way. I just dont get how she is having anxiety raising a Bi-racial baby
External pressure from her family or her partners family could be a major factor. While they may love the baby it could place them at odds with their extended family if the family isn't accepting of a bi-racial child. Having a sudden and major change in their family relationship can be a huge stress point particularly if the point of conflict is due to having a child. I know somebody that was completely disowned by her father for having a kid out of wed lock and he's never relented which was been a major source of emotional pain for her. Growing up I had a close friend who was bi-racial and they don't ever really fit into either the white or black community. Even when they are just being themselves and are color blind within their family the outside world is not nearly as kind, whites always see them as being too black, blacks see them as being too white so they typically aren't fully accepted in either group. The parents are likely well aware of this and it can be a cause of stress as nobody wants their children to be outcasts or judged by skin color. Also there's a good chance that if you are your typical super white type person you don't have the first clue about actual black culture and not what's displayed in the media. That child deserves to understand the other half of their heritage which is possible that she may be concerned over. Just because you read some books on black history doesn't mean you know squat about actually being a black person or the nuances of black culture. How does a white person teach about what the experience and identity of being black is? (or in this case being half black) The parents likely know that they can only really equate to the white half of their child and there will be questions and experiences they can never completely help their child with no matter how much they try. As a white parent how do they adequately explain racial discrimination towards blacks when they have never experienced it? They can theorize and speculate but it's never the same as having lived it. While things have progressed in the last couple decades it's still not easy to be caught in between two worlds.
19370
Post by: daedalus
hotsauceman1 wrote:
I guess I could still see it that way. I just dont get how she is having anxiety raising a Bi-racial baby
Says the man living in liberal California.
I've lived in places where that's "just not what you do". I grew up in a place that black families moved into and then out of within a year because of how their kids were treated. It's a thing. Not saying it's a good thing, but it'd be lying if I said I haven't seen it happen.
30287
Post by: Bromsy
stanman wrote: hotsauceman1 wrote:I guess I could still see it that way. I just dont get how she is having anxiety raising a Bi-racial baby
External pressure from her family or her partners family could be a major factor. While they may love the baby it could place them at odds with their extended family if the family isn't accepting of a bi-racial child. Having a sudden and major change in their family relationship can be a huge stress point particularly if the point of conflict is due to having a child. I know somebody that was completely disowned by her father for having a kid out of wed lock and he's never relented which was been a major source of emotional pain for her.
Growing up I had a close friend who was bi-racial and they don't ever really fit into either the white or black community. Even when they are just being themselves and are color blind within their family the outside world is not nearly as kind, whites always see them as being too black, blacks see them as being too white so they typically aren't fully accepted in either group. The parents are likely well aware of this and it can be a cause of stress as nobody wants their children to be outcasts or judged by skin color.
Also there's a good chance that if you are your typical super white type person you don't have the first clue about actual black culture and not what's displayed in the media. That child deserves to understand the other half of their heritage which is possible that she may be concerned over. Just because you read some books on black history doesn't mean you know squat about actually being a black person or the nuances of black culture. How does a white person teach about what the experience and identity of being black is? (or in this case being half black) The parents likely know that they can only really equate to the white half of their child and there will be questions and experiences they can never completely help their child with no matter how much they try.
As a white parent how do they adequately explain racial discrimination towards blacks when they have never experienced it? They can theorize and speculate but it's never the same as having lived it.
While things have progressed in the last couple decades it's still not easy to be caught in between two worlds.
So you should only adopt kids of your ethnic background? This seems like a strange argument to be making.
67730
Post by: stanman
Bromsy wrote:So you should only adopt kids of your ethnic background? This seems like a strange argument to be making.
No not saying that at all. It's just that everybody's ability to take on those issues is different. Hotsauceman was asking how she could be suffering from anxiety, and several of those issues could easily be a contribution especially when it was an unexpected situation that wasn't planned for. My bi-racial friend's parents had planned for having children and they knew that there'd be times when being mixed race would be difficult, however because one was white and one was black they could at least offer a bit better balance in being able to offer guidance from first hand experiences of dealing with race issues. (where the partners in the article are both white) I think the majority of adopted children have a point in their life where they wonder about who their genetic parents are and what that means to them. There's always questions that aren't able to be answered so it's difficult in a lot of ways, let alone when you start to add in elements and questions of race. The children may feel very loved and supported but there's always an element of the unknown that not every parent may be able or capable of addressing. I think the majority of people find a way to strike that balance, but it doesn't mean that they don't also apply a lot of thought and energy towards reaching that balance and depending on the individual it can potentially build a lot anxiety if the parent doesn't feel they are prepared. The key difference in people adopting kids of a different ethnicity is that they make that choice and seek it out as they feel that they are prepared and capable of raising that child. Where the women in this situation did not make the choice to have a mixed race child, it was forced upon them by the bank's error. Concern for how to properly raise their child and helping that child to develop a strong identity could certainly be adding to their anxiety as it wasn't what they had planned for and are being forced to redesign their parenting plan from the ground up.
514
Post by: Orlanth
hotsauceman1 wrote:But part of the reason is that it is about race
Lack of racial diversity in their town
With the birth of Payton, Cramblett and Zinkon were confronted with raising their mixed race child in Uniontown, Ohio, a rural community south of Akron that, according to the last census, is 98% white.
Cramblett suffers from "stress and anxiety" just thinking of Payton having to attend and all-white school and being "stigmatized or unrecognized."
Lack of racial diversity is not a sole issue.
Even with racial diversity the issue remains.
Children of mixed race in a 98% white neighbourhood may have trouble fitting in.
Children of mixed race in a more diverse neighbourhood might also have trouble fitting in. You see mixed race are neither one nor the other and he chances are both ancestral races peer groups might reject the child.
Post pubescent teens tend to be less tribal than earlier age groups and more radily fit in. Though here upbringing has its mark, as different ethnicities have their own very distinct sub-cultures and it can be different to fit between the two, often being expected to show both cultures at different times Mixed race teens can find it difficult to adjust and can be confusing, or uncomfortable.
A lot of this comes from fear of being accused of being fake, or two faced, by showing two different cultural packages. As a lot of teen identity is based on layering of cultural themes, so for example how you greet people differs dependent on racial cultural grouping. Which can lead to awkward encounters.
That of course is just an example being black or being white or being Asian etc effects how you behave in many subtle ways. Race has actually little to do with it, racial grouping has.
In this respect a mixed race child in a siongle race grouping may have it easier in teenage years. Once the pre-teen colour based profiling changes into social based profiling a mixed race child exhibiting the mannerisms of one parent race can adjust better.
You may ask why the individual doesn't just be himself/herself. However teenage years don't work like that, even in our modern society there is a lot of teen conformity and it's ingrained in the human animal.
Back to topic.
The hard reality is being mixed race has more problems than benefits, it would be ill advised for someone seeking artificial fertilisation to deliberately choose a mixed race baby, and it is in the interests of the mother and child to avoid unnecessary complications by preferring a donor of same ethnic background. This is true regardless of which ethic background that is.
Beyond the feth up of not choosing the corrrect donor, which would be actionable regardless of the race of the donor; there is reason to state that the mother and mixed race child were further disadvantaged in tangible ways that in no way imply or infer inferiority.
221
Post by: Frazzled
I'm trying to figutre out what "damages" are involved here. People adopt mixed race babies all the time. Further, unless I missed it, no genes from either parent were missed-ie there was no Dad involved who can claim they didn't use his genes.
Where's the claim? Are they going to give up the baby now? hey according to them its a defective product.
12313
Post by: Ouze
This question has been answered at length earlier in the thread. Read Stanman's posts.
10050
Post by: Dreadwinter
What are they going to tell her, she is a mistake?
221
Post by: Frazzled
Ouze wrote: This question has been answered at length earlier in the thread. Read Stanman's posts.
I read his argument. I don't see them as payable damages. Again, people adopt and raise interracial babies (or at least interracial to them) all the freaking time. At best we're talking a contract issue on the product. If I were a judge as Da Humies are not "product" I'm not seeing a claim. They could be trying tome sort of "wrongful birth" but there's nothing wrong with the child, obviating negligence. The argument that the area is nicht gut is not and should not be apermissable one. I guess on the positive its good to see this couple destroying any stereotypes that GLBT couples can't be as money grubbing opportunists as any one else.
50832
Post by: Sigvatr
Anyone in here familiar with the Cinema Snob? He reviews terrible old movies and...well...there's one review / movie that's oddly fitting and reminded me of this thread 
http://www.thecinemasnob.com/the-cinema-snob/my-baby-is-black
Movie's called "My Baby is Black".
Trailer for the movie in question:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
The sperm bank offered a service which the customer paid for. They made a mistake and failed to deliver the service both parties agreed on. Sueing them is totally in order imo.
221
Post by: Frazzled
They provided that service. We're just talking the level of service provided.
Other than simple contract law, they really can't go for anything other than wrongful birth in some manner. I don't see this flying.
Even if they won, proving damages would be interesting.
"the area we're at has a lot of racists." I just don't see that working in a court of law, a court of law in the venue the couple are arguing is full of racists.
12313
Post by: Ouze
Frazzled wrote:They provided that service. We're just talking the level of service provided.
To repeat an earlier question:
If your wife were having difficulties conceiving, and you did in-vitro, and then later the lab admitted they accidentally used another mans sperm, would you accept an argument from them that so what, a baby is a baby? You got what you ordered.
No? How about if they gave you back your $300 copay? All better?
221
Post by: Frazzled
"Hey, I ordered a cheeseburger, and you gave me a filet o fish?"
"You got a sandwich, why are you complaining?"
'But I ordered a cheeseburger!"
"You got a sandwich and you got it in the promised timeframe."
Children are not cheeseburgers. While both are tasty with cheese, children cost substantially more.  
They provided a product- los Baby! Did the product have the right melanin content? Nope, ok you get some liquidiated damages.
Arguing racism costs so give me money so I can move to Paris is not a winning argument.
50832
Post by: Sigvatr
Frazzled wrote:They provided that service. We're just talking the level of service provided.
Precisely. Since there has not been a precedence case yet, I have no idea how they are to compensate her, maybe by paying some kind of child support fee for the first 18 years.
Oh, and as I see, I can already cross the "blame the victim" card off here! This is not about her being racist or something, this is about a company breaking a contract and now having to make up for their mistake.
221
Post by: Frazzled
"Raising a child is a lifetime commitment, and now they have a lifetime commitment to raising the wrong child."
How is that the "wrong" child?
What isf the donor had a melanin gifted ancestors, and hey gues what popped out the turkey baster?
I wonder if the contract had an out provision by the clinic.
Should they get some damages? Maybe.
Should they get bazillions? No freaking way. Thats a kick in the teeth to thousands and thousands of couples and childrinz who are that. Suck it up princesses! Put the BMW catalog down and start raising your kid (I bet they're divorced in two years).
10097
Post by: Ensis Ferrae
Frazzled wrote:"Raising a child is a lifetime commitment, and now they have a lifetime commitment to raising the wrong child."
How is that the "wrong" child?
Clearly, they wanted an experimental jazz musician, and are stuck with a rapper *
IIRC, the women themselves have said they're already receiving a ton of negativity from within their own families... Which, I find odd.... MOST families that I personally know or have come across are more OK with a mixed race child, or a child who's skin color doesn't match their parent's at all than they are with a same sex couple.
*yes that is a joke 
221
Post by: Frazzled
Indeed. If their families are ok with them as a couple, then adopting a baby is not a stretch,er at all.
12313
Post by: Ouze
Frazzled wrote:"Raising a child is a lifetime commitment, and now they have a lifetime commitment to raising the wrong child."
How is that the "wrong" child?
It wasn't the donor they carefully selected and paid for?
I mean, I feel like this is really raising the bar in feigned obtuseness, yes?
221
Post by: Frazzled
Er no. Its still not the "wrong child." This views in the Frankesnsteinian farce are getting crazed.
Its a child, (a potentially tasty stop it just stop it babies are not for eating!). It may not have had the right dad, but so the feth what?
They're basically arguing that because where they live at is racist they should get money. No. Move.
Frankly the more I think about it, the more the child should be removed and given to parents who...you know...give a gak. These don't.
12313
Post by: Ouze
Man, this is the most convoluted, twisted path to "blame the victim" I've ever seen, but... here we are. Get the wrong baby, you're probably an unfit parent if you complain about it.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Ouze wrote:Man, this is the most convoluted, twisted path to "blame the victim" I've ever seen, but... here we are. Get the wrong baby, you're probably an unfit parent if you complain about it.
Its not the wrong baby. Thats the issue. Its just a baby with a different skin color and higher chance of hypertension.
Did the husband's genetic material get switched? nope.
Did the mother's? Nope.
I can understand your argument (sort of), but you can't argue wrongful birth here. The child was born. The child was born healthy.
Maybe the parents themselves are racists.
12313
Post by: Ouze
They used the wrong male donor. How is that a "nope"?
221
Post by: Frazzled
Was the donor the husband or the person who was going to be recognized as the father on the birth certificate/under law? Was the donor a family member?
If not then "nope" the donor is merely feedstock to this little machine they bought.
12313
Post by: Ouze
Yeah, this was fruitless, I see that in retrospect. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes, and all that.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Never argue with a lawyer about money and damages. We'll argue just to argue and then drop our finishing move with a little Latin. Res ipso loquitor baby!
37231
Post by: d-usa
Poe's Law is nothing compared to Frazzled's Law!
514
Post by: Orlanth
I wonder if "don't wake a dachshund lest you end up in bloody shreds" sounds scarier in Latin
50832
Post by: Sigvatr
Frazzled wrote:Er no. Its still not the "wrong child." This views in the Frankesnsteinian farce are getting crazed.
So you think that the proper way to handle sperm banks would be like a roulette table, where a woman comes in, gets a random sample injected and walks out again. Randomness, because. Seriously, though, this is a clear-cut case. Company broke the contract, company has to pay. How much - good luck for the judge in question.
37231
Post by: d-usa
There will never be a clear cut case as long as lawyers get paid by the hour!
221
Post by: Frazzled
Poe's Law is nothing compared to Frazzled's Law!
Well, yea. And remember, he who breaks the Law must go to the House of Pain. (whats Poe’s Law – does it involve talking birds?)
I wonder if "don't wake a dachshund lest you end up in bloody shreds" sounds scarier in Latin
Google:
ergo non vigilaveris a dachshund ne finem facias, et sanguinem in ea voluptate velit
So you think that the proper way to handle gene banks would be like a roulette table, where a woman comes in, gets a random sample injected and walks out again.
Of course not. She has to spin the Wheel of Destiny.
My point is that there may be a minor contractual claim, but there’s no claim available from the father that his genetic material was not used. Therefore the only claims are the mother’s. I don’t see claims in equity here as the argument is asinine and is essentially “oh heaven’s to Betsy my baby’s a darkie.” Er this isn’t the 1950s any more.
There will never be a clear cut case as long as lawyers get paid by the hour!
Exactly.
10097
Post by: Ensis Ferrae
 Sigvatr wrote:
Seriously, though, this is a clear-cut case. Company broke the contract, company has to pay. How much - good luck for the judge in question.
I'm kind of with Frazz on this one... The sperm bank gave them a refund of the money that was spent, but only after the couple informed the bank they wanted another child from "same" donor.
Ergo, full refund, and that is the extent of "damages" from the bank's point of view.
Yes, we know a child is more important a matter than a cheeseburger, but the analogy remains the same.... You "opened" the wrapper to find out you were given a fish sandwich, but you ordered a cheeseburger. The "best" the restaurant can do is give you your money back, and make another one correctly... Well, I doubt that even the most die hard baby makers really want to go through all THAT again just to play genetic roulette, and sperm banks aren't adoption agencies so they cant "take it back" either.
Also, per the OP, they were bitchin' about having to "learn" how to do black children's hair!? Boo freakin' hoo!!! A good friend of mine and his wife adopted a black child and they went and just did the research without bitching about it! They're fething parents' it's part and parcel for the job.
38860
Post by: MrDwhitey
Er, no.
221
Post by: Frazzled
 Ensis Ferrae wrote: Sigvatr wrote:
Seriously, though, this is a clear-cut case. Company broke the contract, company has to pay. How much - good luck for the judge in question.
I'm kind of with Frazz on this one... The sperm bank gave them a refund of the money that was spent, but only after the couple informed the bank they wanted another child from "same" donor.
Ergo, full refund, and that is the extent of "damages" from the bank's point of view.
Yes, we know a child is more important a matter than a cheeseburger, but the analogy remains the same.... You "opened" the wrapper to find out you were given a fish sandwich, but you ordered a cheeseburger. The "best" the restaurant can do is give you your money back, and make another one correctly... Well, I doubt that even the most die hard baby makers really want to go through all THAT again just to play genetic roulette, and sperm banks aren't adoption agencies so they cant "take it back" either.
Also, per the OP, they were bitchin' about having to "learn" how to do black children's hair!? Boo freakin' hoo!!! A good friend of mine and his wife adopted a black child and they went and just did the research without bitching about it! They're fething parents' it's part and parcel for the job.
Exactly.
37231
Post by: d-usa
So if a hospital is negligent during a birth and causes permanent brain damage to a child, they shouldn't have to pay damages because another couple might willingly adopt a handicapped child anyway?
35006
Post by: Medium of Death
stanman wrote:Could you imagine the horror if somebody were to go to a sperm bank and had a ginger kid on accident?
BY!
12313
Post by: Ouze
So to be clear: If a couple is having problems conceiving, and they get in-vitro fertilization, and then later the lab admits that they used another man's semen; some of you would not see this as a problem, as long as they offered to refund part of your $400 copay? A baby was requested, a baby was produced, right?
221
Post by: Frazzled
 d-usa wrote:So if a hospital is negligent during a birth and causes permanent brain damage to a child, they shouldn't have to pay damages because another couple might willingly adopt a handicapped child anyway?
No thats a claim for negligent birth. They have no grounds for that here. Automatically Appended Next Post: Ouze wrote:So to be clear: If a couple is having problems conceiving, and they get in-vitro fertilization, and then later the lab admits that they used another man's semen; some of you would not see this as a problem, as long as they offered to refund part of your $400 copay? A baby was requested, a baby was produced, right?
Nope in that case one of the parents wouldn't be a parent. That is not this case. They bought a shake and bake baby with the genetic material of one parent only. That was done accurately. Following your logic if the baby they get turns out to have a genetic defect is the bank liable? After all thats pretty much what their arguing.
68355
Post by: easysauce
Frazzled wrote: d-usa wrote:So if a hospital is negligent during a birth and causes permanent brain damage to a child, they shouldn't have to pay damages because another couple might willingly adopt a handicapped child anyway?
No thats a claim for negligent birth. They have no grounds for that here.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ouze wrote:So to be clear: If a couple is having problems conceiving, and they get in-vitro fertilization, and then later the lab admits that they used another man's semen; some of you would not see this as a problem, as long as they offered to refund part of your $400 copay? A baby was requested, a baby was produced, right?
Nope in that case one of the parents wouldn't be a parent. That is not this case.
I would call this one negligent though frazz...
think of it this way,
this woman gave consent for donor 308 to impregnate her,
instead she was impregnated by donor 303, without her consent.
How is her being impregnated, without consent, not a sue-able thing?
black families would have issues with a white baby they were not expecting, and wouldnt be given any greif over sueing for getting the wrong donor and the consequencesfor the rest of their lives because of that, so I dont see why the reverse is somehow not allowed.
67730
Post by: stanman
I remember reading about a case a few years back where a doctor at a fertility clinic had been intentionally inseminating patients with his own sperm, instead of doing it with the donor's sperm that the patients thought they had selected. The Doctor had a "so what attitude?" as they wanted kids and he gave them kids, ignoring the fact that he had completely misled and lied about who the biological father (donor) actually was. As a result of this bait and switch tactic he'd fathered literally hundreds of kids with unsuspecting patients. He was convicted of multiple counts of fraud and got significant jail time as well as losing his medical license and having his business closed for malpractice. In the current case it was accidental but I think there is very strong grounds for a medical malpractice suit. I had to google just what exactly you were going on about. (pun intended) Seems it's one of those oddities typically used by Americans under 35. All that really matters is that we both agree that having ginger kids would be horrible
12313
Post by: Ouze
"On" vs "by" drives me nuts as well. I'm a strict "by" man... I never heard "on" until I got to the midwest.
91
Post by: Hordini
Ouze wrote:"On" vs "by" drives me nuts as well. I'm a strict "by" man... I never heard "on" until I got to the midwest.
It's just a minor dialectal difference. It's no worse than someone saying "at the weekend" instead of "on the weekend" or "during the weekend," or that someone is "in hospital" instead of "in the hospital."
58873
Post by: BobtheInquisitor
Ouze wrote:So to be clear: If a couple is having problems conceiving, and they get in-vitro fertilization, and then later the lab admits that they used another man's semen; some of you would not see this as a problem, as long as they offered to refund part of your $400 copay? A baby was requested, a baby was produced, right?
Even with very good insurance, IVF is more like $25,000.
12313
Post by: Ouze
Sure, but it was the principle I was arguing, that lifelong medical errors can be obviated by a partial refund - lets pretend my hypothetical couple has amazing insurance.
10097
Post by: Ensis Ferrae
Ouze wrote:Sure, but it was the principle I was arguing, that lifelong medical errors can be obviated by a partial refund - lets pretend my hypothetical couple has amazing insurance.
As it's been argued, I don't think so, because the both spouse's genetic material is involved. Whereas the people in the OP are using a "blind survey" sort of thing for a donor... IF the forms are at all filled in by hand, it's VERY easy to see how the woman who filled it out could have been mistaken for writing 330, instead of 380, or vice versa.
If this does go to court, I'm sure that documentation will be presented as evidence to show that there was an honest to goodness mistake, and that the sperm bank did as much as it could to rectify the situation. This is nowhere near the level of that doctor from the invitro clinic who was using his own sperm instead of the male spouse of the couple's. This is completely different from a left lung transplant when the patient needed a new right lung,
27151
Post by: streamdragon
Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Yes, we know a child is more important a matter than a cheeseburger, but the analogy remains the same.... You "opened" the wrapper to find out you were given a fish sandwich, but you ordered a cheeseburger. The "best" the restaurant can do is give you your money back, and make another one correctly... Well, I doubt that even the most die hard baby makers really want to go through all THAT again just to play genetic roulette, and sperm banks aren't adoption agencies so they cant "take it back" either.
I didn't realize you had to sign a contract with every cheeseburger purchase.
221
Post by: Frazzled
streamdragon wrote: Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Yes, we know a child is more important a matter than a cheeseburger, but the analogy remains the same.... You "opened" the wrapper to find out you were given a fish sandwich, but you ordered a cheeseburger. The "best" the restaurant can do is give you your money back, and make another one correctly... Well, I doubt that even the most die hard baby makers really want to go through all THAT again just to play genetic roulette, and sperm banks aren't adoption agencies so they cant "take it back" either.
I didn't realize you had to sign a contract with every cheeseburger purchase.
Sign? Well if you paid by credit card. But you are entering into a contract when you're buying a cheeseburger. And its delicious!
10097
Post by: Ensis Ferrae
streamdragon wrote: Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Yes, we know a child is more important a matter than a cheeseburger, but the analogy remains the same.... You "opened" the wrapper to find out you were given a fish sandwich, but you ordered a cheeseburger. The "best" the restaurant can do is give you your money back, and make another one correctly... Well, I doubt that even the most die hard baby makers really want to go through all THAT again just to play genetic roulette, and sperm banks aren't adoption agencies so they cant "take it back" either.
I didn't realize you had to sign a contract with every cheeseburger purchase.
Buying a cheeseburger, or groceries are the quickest form of contract, even if you're paying cash... In its most basic form, a contract is nothing more than "I give you something, and in return, you give me something"
|
|
