Sir, As the author of Fathers Matter and further to my letter “Right to know” (Nov 27), once again I feel compelled to put the case for fathers after reading about Andy Bathie, who donated his sperm to a lesbian couple and is now being pursued for maintenance by the Child Support Agency (report, Dec 4). His scenario raises yet another anomaly in the law.

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 states that when a man consents to his sperm being donated for the purpose of licensed fertility treatment, he will not be treated as the father of the child. The problem is that, as a result of a change in the law in 2005 enabling an adult child to contact the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority to discover the identity of his/her father, there has been a decline in the number of sperm donors.

Consequently, there has been an increase in the number of single women and lesbian couples approaching male friends and asking them to donate sperm to enable them to have a child, with potentially dire legal consequences for these accommodating males. It is morally wrong to expect these men to pay any maintenance in such circumstances just because of a loophole in the law, when clearly the intention was for them never to have any rights over, let alone for, the children.

Last week the Court of Appeal denied a biological father the right even to know about the existence of his daughter because the child was the product of “a one-night stand” and yet he could have been made to pay maintenance for his daughter had the mother chosen to pursue a claim against him for it. Blood ties were deemed unimportant in that case. One of the questions raised by the Court of Appeal’s decision is what is the legal status of a biological father now? Does biology matter?

Well, yes it seems, but only when it suits and comes to money and maintenance.

Celia Conrad

Author and child law specialist

London W11

Explore Letters

• Feedback