Currently there is a case before the Family Court concerning a millionaire businessman who donated sperm to a former girlfriend to enable her to conceive a child.
The dispute surrounds whether or not the father should have "access" to the child.
The case is awaiting final hearing. In the interim period, it is reported that the child will see his father for two hours, twice per week.
This case reminds me of one I had in my pre-collaborative days. A male couple agreed to assist a female couple to conceive a child and sperm was donated by one of the males. Unfortunately, the relationships between parties broke down. My client came to me wanting to take her son overseas to see family, but was unable to do so without the sperm donor's permission as he was listed on the birth certificate. Litigation was commenced...
I can't help but wonder how these two cases might have had difference outcomes if a collaborative process was adopted.
In both instances, the donors and mothers were friends (hence the donation!) As a result of their dispute, any hope of friendship is likely lost. The child may be faced with acrimony between the mother and the donor for years to come (let's face it - litigation rarely fosters better relationships between parties....)
Had they engaged in a collaborative process, they could have approached this in a way that was respectful to each other and worked towards the best outcome for all of them - first and foremost, the child.
Perhaps a child specialist, working as part of the collaborative team, in private, could have been the one to tell the parties of the psychological damage the child could suffer and help them work towards a solution, rather than that evidence being aired in a courtroom and reported for the world to read.
Perhaps they might all still be friends - or at least have a co-operative or civil relationship....
No comments:
Post a Comment