A woman who was impregnated by a male escort at a hotel failed in a legal battle to find out his identity.
In 2010, the woman and the escort spent three nights at the hotel; he impregnated her during that time. The hotel, BBC reported, is not legally obligated to reveal the man’s identity to the woman — and his right to privacy was ultimately given precedence in court over her demand for child support.
The woman reportedly knew the escort as “Michael,” but there were three other men named Michael in the hotel at the time. The court ruling stated that the four men had a right to “control their own data and protect their own marriage and family.”
The court ultimately decided that the the woman’s lack of identifying details about the father of her now-7-year-old son Joel presented too much risk of personal information “being released at random.”
“Nor is it certain that the Christian name is indeed the name of the man in question,” the court added.
The Munich Appeal Court also decided not to take on the case, a spokeswoman told the BBC — meaning that the case is closed in accordance with German law.
Many readers agreed with the court’s decision, putting blame on the woman for making the choice to hire an escort.
“He is a male prostitute that she hired. He did exactly what she wanted. This is just as stupid as a woman going to a sperm bank then wanting to know the identity of the donor so she can collect child support. It is the exact same thing,” one Mad World News reader commented on the site’s Facebook page.
“Anyone who thinks he’s responsible is a complete idiot. If she didn’t demand he use protection especially with a prostitute she’s a complete moron. Diseases alone should make her want to demand he uses a condom and the fact that I’ve never heard of a stripper or hooker that uses their real names she should have been smart enough to make sure she is on the pill or something to keep from getting knocked up if she’s out screwing anyone. If it’s your body and you make all the decisions about killing it, having it, or adopting it out then you should be making damn sure you are protecting your body from getting knocked up, it’s called personal responsibility,” another wrote.
Others, however, felt that blame and responsibility should be placed on both parents regardless of the circumstances that led to the pregnancy.
“They’re both guilty and I don’t agree with the court not holding him accountable. The BOTH of them are responsible for protection. The child is the real victim here,” one reader wrote.
“This shows how stupid courts are. He chose not to protect himself acting negligently. He helped create a baby regardless of his right to privacy. That’s just stupid. And she’s stupid too,” another added.
Sources: BBC, Mad World News/Facebook / Photo credit: Pexels