Publication Date



Much of the law relating to child support is based on the
fact that it is typically in a child's best interest to receive
financial support from mothers as well as fathers. In fact,
child support is essentially a form of strict liability with
the justification being that the child is an innocent party,
and thus, even those men who never consented to the
sexual act that caused the pregnancy are nonetheless

liable for the support of the resulting child. These men
include males who become fathers as a result of statutory
rape and also adult males who became fathers either as a
result of sexual assault or having their sperm stolen and
used by a woman for purposes of self-insemination.
However, the courts' justification that all children are
entitled to support from both biological parents has been
seriously undermined by the laws regulating artificial
insemination. In that context, a man only becomes the
legal father of an artificially inseminated child if he
affirmatively consents to fatherhood. This Article argues
that it is incongruous to allow exceptions for formal sperm
donors yet deny similar protections wholesale for those
who, although not in the setting of a sperm bank, never
consented to the use of their sperm. Accordingly, this
Article proposes that courts adopt an approach similar
(albeit narrower) to that used in artificial insemination
cases to adjudicate child support claims against those men
who were forced into fatherhood as a result of
nonconsensual insemination.