The above link provides the cause of a woman who has gone to court stating that the donor of one’s own sperms has to take the consent of one’s wife, as she claims that her husband’s sperm is a MARITAL ASSET!
Whenever we talk of assets we have to see who has the TITLE to it; who is in POSSESSION of the ‘asset’; who is ENJOYING it and finally whether the owner/possessor/enjoyer of the ASSET has the power to ALIENATE and if so to what extent.
Let us take the issue of the TITLE to the SPERMS: a man’s body produces it and is stored in his own body and he therefore is the producer, storer and dispenser of the ‘asset’. But does this change when a woman gets married to a man- Does she acquire the TITLE to it? No, not at all. The woman could have entered into a marital contract /sacrament which entitles her to socially present the man as her husband and where polygyny is allowed, the woman becomes a co-wife of the man and neither individually nor collectively does the WIFE ACQUIRE A RIGHT to the TITLE to the husband’s body or the ‘produce’ therefrom! She just has the LICENSE to co-habit and demand MAINTENANCE to her and the children fathered by him through her.
The wife at no time becomes a POSSESSOR of the man because of her marriage to him. There was a time when the wife was thought of to be a chattel to her husband, and this has changed. Further, as per most of the EVIDENCE ACTS of various countries in a LIBERAL MODE, there is a presumption that the child born during the subsistence of a marriage the husband is presumed to be the father of the child born during the marriage (except when the man is able to prove that he did not/could not have stayed with her in the last 10 months!). This is almost a CONCLUSIVE PROOF! Why this section is in the statutes? Because, even if the woman had played the whore, if the man was designated as her husband, for the sake of the welfare of the child, the husband should be made the FATHER! When such presumptions are available for women, in the name of ‘child’s future’, the wife cannot claim custodianship for her husband’s sperms.
At best a wife could be called the ENJOYER as a licensee to the benefit of the sperms of the husband as she has a right to have physical intimacy with her husband, but that does not alter her status to a TITLE HOLDER or a POSSESSOR of the ‘asset’.
Further, gone are the days when a human being or his/her body parts/secretions could be called as ANY OTHER PERSON’S ASSET. The INTEGRITY of a human body has been assigned to each individual and no one can later that under any sane law.
The reason forwarded by this woman is that if the man were to donate sperms, the biological children may turn up in a future date and disturb the FAMILY PEACE1 How specious! Don’t we know how our own N D TIWARI had fathered a son outside his wedlock and the son got a court decree stating that N.D Tiwari was his “father”? Family peace could be destroyed even by other means and there are no guarantees applicable on this count.
This whole issue of wanting the court to declare SPERM as a MARITAL ASSET is one of those slimy agendas of the women’s lib to shackle men and curb MAN’s LIBERTIES.
This blogger is well aware of WOMEN who go on the sly and DONATE EGGS and make extra bucks on the sides. Even though the procedure for egg donation might be elaborate, there have been reported instances where the woman has gone and donated her own eggs for consideration or for other reasons! Plz read this item below on egg donation- they make it look so regulated, but clinics have field day on this .
From gender equality, women seem to have launched on one-up-womanship! At least let humans give the liberty to individuals to dispose of their body ‘produce’ as each wishes, without gender classification.