I think its unfair that he is being made to pay for the children.... this wasnt the original agreement and it is effecting his life outside of this situation now.
Very unfair. Not his fault the lesbians relationship broke down.

This will make sperm donors of the future reveiw decisions they make about donating .

Lesbian mother hits back in row over donor's support payments

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2221742,00.html

But today Terri Arnold - who has since separated from her partner Sharon - insisted Bathie had wanted to act as father to her children.
She told GMTV: "He was a father to the children, a dad. He played a father's role for two years of their, well, my daughter's life."

Arnold admitted she had made an initial arrangement with Bathie for him just to be a donor. But she said: "He was Uncle Andy but, after the christening, he said he didn't want to be the uncle; he wanted to be the daddy. It was him that changed his mind."

She said Bathie saw her daughter one weekend every month for two years.

"We've got photographs of our little girl at his home, we've got a box full of birthday and Christmas cards from him saying 'from daddy'. He bought her a silver trinket box and engraved it 'daddy'," she said.

Arnold said Bathie paid towards his daughter's pram and shoes and regularly bought her treats and presents.

Two years after her birth, Bathie became the lesbian couple's sperm donor for a second time and Arnold gave birth to a little boy. But shortly afterwards, Arnold said he no longer wanted to see the children.

---

a similar case:

Sperm donor to pay child support

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,16904774-23109,00.html

A SWEDISH man who donated his sperm to a lesbian couple must pay child support for the three children he fathered, Sweden's Supreme Court ruled today.

The man, now 39, donated his sperm to the couple in the early 1990s. Three sons were born during the years 1992-1996, according to Swedish news agency TT which reported the ruling.

The man told the court that he and the women had agreed that he would play no role in the boys' child rearing and that the two women would be their parents.

Nonetheless, the man signed a document confirming that he was the biological father of the children.

Shortly after he signed the document, the two women separated and the biological mother demanded that the man pay child support.

The man took the case to court, but lost in the district and appeals courts.

The Supreme Court upheld those rulings today, saying that as the biological father he is required to pay for the children's upbringing.