From the New York Post: “Professor who donates sperm in city bathrooms has sired 22 kids.”
The 6-foot-2 CUNY Kingsborough math professor [Ari Nagel] has served as a sperm donor for dozens of locals, siring 22 kids over the past 12 years with 18 women of various backgrounds.
He will also offer his services in his home near Downtown Brooklyn, but mama wannabes are often more comfortable meeting in public.
Once a location is chosen, Nagel will go into the bathroom, pleasure himself while watching porn on his iPhone — “You can’t connect to Target Wi-Fi if you’re connecting to a porn site, so I use my cell service,” he says — and ejaculate into an Instead Softcup, a type of menstrual cup.
He then delivers the specimen to the woman, who goes into the ladies’ restroom and inserts it into her cervix.
Without the explicit legal protections afforded to sperm banks, what about post-conception litigation?
The first five women he worked with successfully sued him for child support, and nearly half of his paycheck is garnished for his offspring.
“I don’t know what’s more surprising: that five sued or that 17 didn’t,” Nagel says. “They were all well aware there was no financial obligation on my part. They all promise in advance they won’t sue.”
(Under New York family law, he actually should have lost close to 100 percent of his paycheck to the five plaintiffs. Assuming one child per mother, the first plaintiff would receive 17 percent of his pre-tax income, the second woman to sue would get 17 percent of the 83 percent remainder, etc. Due to the fact that child support is not deductible from income, Professor Nagel would quickly get to the poverty line from a combination of child support orders and federal, state, and city income taxes. Assuming that he starts with $100,000 per year, the first plaintiff gets $17,000 per year, the second $14,110, the third $11,711, and the fourth just $9,720 per year. The professor is now left with $47,458 of pre-tax income but close to $40,000 of that would go to pay taxes. The fifth plaintiff ought to get $8,068 but in theory the system is not supposed to reduce a defendant below the poverty line. Note that it may not be accidental that the first five women sued. Due to the difference in cash values assigned to children under New York law, the sixth and later women don’t have a claim worth pursuing against Professor Nagel. So it would be more accurate to say that 100 percent of the people who could have sued him and gotten something actually did sue.)