I'm sorry but he was trying to sue the clinic in order to pay for the child's upbringing and not the mother. I can see how he could have a case against her but against the clinic? They did nothing against the law and were operating in line with industry practice.

The case has nothing to do with gender and for you to read that into it says something about you.

Nope disagree on your points, which have already been raised and answered in the thread.

As for the personal insult. How the legal system is set up to disadvantage males in areas like this is a perfectly fair topic to bring up.

This isn't against women, who speaking as a bloke are generally bloody wonderful. It's about fairness within the system.

I view this situation as an illustration of that unfairness.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Scandalous.
1. Surely knowing those eggs were frozen he should have made some legal approach to the clinic in question to state the couple were no longer together and under no circumstances were they to he used in future.

2. How can she just turn up and hand the form in with his signature on to the clinic without him having to be present. It being witnessed, checked and so on. Sounds as though the clinic aren't very thorough.

3. The list of demands. In particular the wedding and bedroom refurbishment is a piss take. So is a demand for private schooling. Unless it can be proven their other children were already in the private education sector then it's an outrage he is demanding this.

4. Disgusting behaviour from the mother quite frankly. A woman's hormones and desire to have a baby are very powerful but the way in which she has behaved is shocking. Similarly as angry as the father is , which I understand, there's something a bit unpalatable about the father bringing a legal case such as this. How on earth will the poor child feel knowing all this

When I was a young girl my Mother said to me.. You listen here kid you're CPFC

I feel marginally sorry for the bloke but he's clearly trying it on to get a payout.

I really don't see how it's at all unfair to men specifically.

If this is the kind of thing men feel they need to moan about the perceived unfairness of then I need to dust of the world's smallest violin. Men still have it 100x better than women.

The practice were interviewed on Radio 4 and said they've tightened their procedures - and now make a phone call if both parties cannot attend in person! Doesn't sound much of a fail-safe improvement to me.

The mother is clearly a selfish, manipulative, b1tch, and, were it not to lead to further pain for the child, I'd like to see her locked up AND sued for every penny she has.

The clinic practices were / are insufficient, but I presume he knew that (and if he didn't he should have) but this is a straight forward case of fraud, and the book should be thrown at the mother in a criminal case, not a civil one.

I don't really see a gender inequality here, though I've been trying to think how it would play out if the father turned up with his new girlfriend with a forged consent form and had the egg implanted into her, but again, I'd see that as a criminal case for fraud rather than a civil one against the clinic

I pretty much agree with most of that.

I agree, hurting the mother just hurts the child.....So again, more unfairness. We create more problems by pursuing the mother.....realities of nature come to her aid.

I see the gender unfairness in the outcome for the male here. Him being liable for what should be seen as a criminal act and negligent company practice.

But that's just my personal layman's view.

Edited by Stirlingsays (06 Oct 2017 2.49pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)