FILE PHOTO

(CHARLOTTE HELSTON / iNFOnews.ca)

A Kamloops man who agreed to let a couple use his sperm to have a baby has managed to get more parenting time after the three ended up in court.

According to a Dec. 31, 2024, BC Supreme Court decision, the man who donated the sperm fell out with the couple before the baby was born, and has had very little to do with the child since.

The decision said the sperm donor had known his friend for more than a decade, and when the friend got married but couldn't have a child with his wife, he stepped in to help.

The man donated his sperm and the couple began fertility treatment.

They signed a multi-parent agreement saying they would all be legal parents of the child and equally share parenting time and the sperm donor would either live with the couple or nearby.

All the names in the decision are redacted.

In January 2021, the donor moved in with the couple, however, it didn't take long before things started to fall apart and 18 months later the relationship had soured.

"The reason for the failing relationship is unclear. The claimant blames the respondents and the respondents blame the claimant," the decision read.

A month after the donor moved out, the child was born.

However, the couple have limited the donor's time with the child, citing concern for the the child's safety.

READ MORE: Kamloops dog narrowly escapes trapper's snare in popular recreational area

In May 2024, the donor began legal action against the couple asking the court to order that the couple retain a qualified divorce coach to provide co-parenting counselling and that he get more parenting time with the child.

The decision said the three agreed to counselling and that the donor would pay $729 a month in child support payments.

However, the couple didn't agree on more parenting time.

They argued the donor was depressed and had thoughts of suicide and wanted the court to order a specific assessment of how his mental health would impact the needs of the child.

The donor agreed he'd been depressed but said he had been taking counselling and it was under control.

BC Supreme Court Justice Dennis Hori said the couple's concern about the donor's mental health was out of proportion when compared to evidence from his counsellor, saying it was an "attempt to create parenting controversies where none exist."

The decision said the donor was only spending three-and-a-half hours per week with the child and wanted more time.

READ MORE: 'Toxic and unsafe': IH nurse's Human Rights complaint moves forward

The couple argued the donor had no real-life experience of taking care of the toddler, was awkward with the child, and wouldn't accept their advice.

However, a report submitted to the court said the donor was becoming more confident, relaxed and natural in his interactions with the child.

"The concerns raised by the (couple) appear to be related to criticisms that would apply to any new parent," the Justice said, adding the couple's concerns were "exaggeration and... misplaced."

The couple also claimed they'd been victims of family violence at the hands of the donor.

The decision didn't say what took place but the Justice said it was at the "low end" of the scale.

"The evidence of a pattern of coercive and controlling behaviour is weak," the Justice said. "None of the alleged family violence was directed toward the child... (and) there is no evidence of serious harm to the child’s physical, psychological or emotional safety, security or well-being."

The Justice said this was no reason to deprive the donor of parenting time.

Ultimately, the Justice increased the donor's parenting time to 12 hours a week, which will increase to full weekend visits by the summer.

To contact a reporter for this story, email Ben Bulmer or call (250) 309-5230 or email the editor. You can also submit photos, videos or news tips to the newsroom and be entered to win a monthly prize draw.

We welcome your comments and opinions on our stories but play nice. We won't censor or delete comments unless they contain off-topic statements or links, unnecessary vulgarity, false facts, spam or obviously fake profiles. If you have any concerns about what you see in comments, email the editor in the link above. SUBSCRIBE to our awesome newsletter here.

News from © iNFOnews, 2025