A judge has ordered a Wisconsin father of nine that he must stop having kids until he can prove that he can financially care for each and every one of the children that he already has.
And thus begins a tricky legal question of what can the state say about what you do with your dong.
Corey Curtis has nine kids that he fathered with six separate women. He also owes over $100,000 in back child support payments with interest included. Racine County prosecutors went after him and Judge Tim Boyle made the ruling that he is now barred from fathering anymore children until he can prove that his current brood is cared for.
Citing “common sense,” the judge actually seemed kind of sad that he couldn’t just have the guy straight up sterilized, but castration in the legal system is typically reserved for child molesters and other sexual predators.
ADA Rebecca Sommers made the case that the judge had the authority to essentially put a gag order on Curtis’ sexual conquests (I see what I did there). In 2001, the Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld a ruling giving a judge power to halt a defendant’s right to procreate as a condition of his probation until the defendant can show that he could financially provide for any current and future children.
And that’s exactly what Judge Boyle did. Giving Curtis three years’ probation, he can’t have any kids during that time.
The legal tightrope is worked through thusly — one’s rights aren’t being violated because the defendant in question cannot or will not make child support payments. It’s not a permanent ban and it’s relevant to the reason why they’re in front of a judge in the first place. If they made child support payments as is their legal obligation, then the state wouldn’t be paying court costs just to make a douchebag be a man for once in his life and care for his kids.
For his part, Curtis told local TV that he would comply with the decision. Whether that means “pay up” or “stop having kids” or, preferably, both, remains to be seen.
Question: Are the courts going too far with this restriction on reproductive rights? Or is this just a case of good old fashioned common sense?