From Greg Shill, guest-blogging at The Conglomerate, of all places. He’s talking about a recent Kansas decision that found a sperm donor to be the legal father of a lesbian (ex-)couple’s child, despite all the parties having signed a contract to the contrary. Under Kansas law (and that of several other states which adopted the same uniform legislation), a sperm donor’s parental obligations may only be severed when the procedure is performed by a doctor:

There are sound public policy reasons to be concerned about voluntariness in agreements that waive paternity. But if this case is really about ensuring voluntariness, why is enlisting doctors the solution? Establishing consent during contract formation is not some novel problem. Hiring a doctor is a novel solution, but as an evidentiary device it is not very probative.

This rule looks even more like an attempt to extract rents when you consider that for many people, the price of artificial insemination without physician assistance may be zero.