Cupid

tlb wrote:From Wikipedia:

On 27 June 2016, Grant Bavister, Assistant Register to the Baronetage at the Ministry of Justice, entered Sir Ronald Steuart Pringle and his son Sir Norman Murray Pringle onto the Official Roll of the Baronetage, as the 9th and 10th de jure Baronets. He also removed the de facto 9th and 10th Baronets, Norman Hamilton Pringle and his son Steuart Robert Pringle, from the Roll, in accordance with the Royal Warrant of 1910. Certificates of succession to this effect were issued to Sir Norman Murray Pringle on 1 July 2016.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:I think the case that cthia is creating is even more complicated than this, and is something where science is outpacing the law. Today.

Let's start with the uncontroversial case: man and woman are married, man gives permission to use his frozen sperm to impregnate the woman. Child is legitimate heir.

Now let's say this woman does not get permission and impregnates herself anyway. I'd say it's still uncontroversial: the child is legitimate and an heir. But the woman may get in trouble for stealing the sperm (if she wasn't a co-owner anyway).

What if the man has passed away? Even assuming theft, the child itself is blameless and probably an heir, though it might be difficult to redistribute the assets if the will was executed a long time before. Note I said "an heir" not "a legitimate child," since there may still be provisions in the law about children born outside of marriage as illegitimate (bastards).

What if the woman that gets impregnated was never married to this man in the first place? How is this different from an anonymous sperm donor?

I don't know the answers to any of those questions. Just asking them.

tlb wrote:A child born where the sperm donor was not married to the mother is not legitimate for purposes of inheriting a title.

Whether or not she had permission to use the sperm, if it demonstrably occurred after the sperm donor was dead, then she was not married to the donor and so the child was illegitimate. Therefore the child cannot inherit the title under English law (Manticore is modeled in many ways on England).

My charge was a lot smarter than all of the Youngs collectively. She would have thoroughly looked into the matter. As a result, if Manticoran law says she had to be married at the time and Stefan had to be alive, then she would have had herself impregnated while he was alive and had the child tubed. Then she could have elected to have the embryo placed back inside of her at her earliest convenience. All potential problems of inheritance solved.

She could have done the same thing while she was with Pavel, meaning both kids are in line for inheritance.

BTW, a legal will can be written on a napkin.

Don't you all see where this is headed? If she gets everything and then she and Jeremy fall in love and get married, then ...

Two slaves from rags, to riches, to nobility. That would do a whole hell of a lot of good for the Young line.

cthia wrote:Don't you all see where this is headed? If she gets everything and then she and Jeremy fall in love and get married, then ...

Two slaves from rags, to riches, to nobility. That would do a whole hell of a lot of good for the Young line.

cthia wrote:She could have done the same thing while she was with Pavel, meaning both kids are in line for inheritance.

No child of hers with Pavel would be in line for inheritance of a title, since that child is clearly illegitimate. I don't know why you bring that up, since only a legitimate child be Stefan would be of interest.

I am not sure that Jeremy even gets a title, since she is only the Dowager. As the Dowager she only gets what is in Stefan's will; certainly she is not the new Earl of North Hollow.

You say that that she had a embryos created while married and saved for later (the process of saving is freezing; not tubing, since there the embryo continues to develop, only in an artificial womb). Turns out, even today in our world, frozen embryos are subject to the same sort of law. Specifically they have to be mentioned in Stefan's will. In the case of an Earl, the will is a major formality and if she tries to come back much later with something scribbled on a napkin (particularly after the formal will is read), then she is going to have major legal problems.

But she has major legal problems anyway, since she will be standing trial on Torch for capital crimes.

tlb wrote:

cthia wrote:Don't you all see where this is headed? If she gets everything and then she and Jeremy fall in love and get married, then ...

Two slaves from rags, to riches, to nobility. That would do a whole hell of a lot of good for the Young line.

cthia wrote:She could have done the same thing while she was with Pavel, meaning both kids are in line for inheritance.

No child of hers with Pavel would be in line for inheritance of a title, since that child is clearly illegitimate. I don't know why you bring that up, since only a legitimate child be Stefan would be of interest.

I am not sure that Jeremy even gets a title, since she is only the Dowager. As the Dowager she only gets what is in Stefan's will; certainly she is not the new Earl of North Hollow.

You say that that she had a embryos created while married and saved for later (the process of saving is freezing; not tubing, since there the embryo continues to develop, only in an artificial womb). Turns out, even today in our world, frozen embryos are subject to the same sort of law. Specifically they have to be mentioned in Stefan's will. In the case of an Earl, the will is a major formality and if she tries to come back much later with something scribbled on a napkin (particularly after the formal will is read), then she is going to have major legal problems.

But she has major legal problems anyway, since she will be standing trial on Torch for capital crimes.

I think you missed the first of a double post. If she inseminated herself with Stefan's sperm while he was alive, and had the child tubed, then the child was conceived while the father was alive.

tlb wrote:You say that that she had a embryos created while married and saved for later (the process of saving is freezing; not tubing, since there the embryo continues to develop, only in an artificial womb). Turns out, even today in our world, frozen embryos are subject to the same sort of law. Specifically they have to be mentioned in Stefan's will. In the case of an Earl, the will is a major formality and if she tries to come back much later with something scribbled on a napkin (particularly after the formal will is read), then she is going to have major legal problems.

cthia wrote:I think you missed the first of a double post. If she inseminated herself with Stefan's sperm while he was alive, and had the child tubed, then the child was conceived while the father was alive.

No, I specifically answered it here. To repeat, an stored embryo has to be specifically mentioned in the father's will. You might also read the comments about her trying to produce a new will at some later date.

tlb wrote:

tlb wrote:You say that that she had a embryos created while married and saved for later (the process of saving is freezing; not tubing, since there the embryo continues to develop, only in an artificial womb). Turns out, even today in our world, frozen embryos are subject to the same sort of law. Specifically they have to be mentioned in Stefan's will. In the case of an Earl, the will is a major formality and if she tries to come back much later with something scribbled on a napkin (particularly after the formal will is read), then she is going to have major legal problems.

cthia wrote:I think you missed the first of a double post. If she inseminated herself with Stefan's sperm while he was alive, and had the child tubed, then the child was conceived while the father was alive.

No, I specifically answered it here. To repeat, an stored embryo has to be specifically mentioned in the father's will. You might also read the comments about her trying to produce a new will at some later date.

A legitimate son does not need a will.

cthia wrote:I think you missed the first of a double post. If she inseminated herself with Stefan's sperm while he was alive, and had the child tubed, then the child was conceived while the father was alive.

Seemingly only true if the tubing was allowed to continue uninterrupted -- IOW completing in under 9 months from his death. (Not that Stefan is dead yet - just retired in seclusion after the destruction of his home and disappearance of his wife [or at least so says House of Steel])

Also as some point he'd presumably be able to get a divorce from his long missing wife -- assuming she wasn't declared presumed dead first. And after that point any child she conceives, unfreezes, etc. with him or his genetics wouldn't be a legitimate one; as they'd no longer be married.


So she'd have to sneak back into Manticore while still his wofe, without running afoul of the law or the Ballroom, get impregnated, arrange for Stefan to die, and then try to claim temporary control of the Earldom in the name of their child.

Seems unlikely to work. And definitely doesn't seem like the kind of story that RFC would write.

cthia wrote:If she inseminated herself with Stefan's sperm while he was alive, and had the child tubed, then the child was conceived while the father was alive.

tlb wrote:No, I specifically answered it here. To repeat, an stored embryo has to be specifically mentioned in the father's will. You might also read the comments about her trying to produce a new will at some later date.

cthia wrote:A legitimate son does not need a will.

I am willing to accept (only for sake of argument) that the embryo was conceived as part of a legal marriage. The part you keep missing is that you are having this embryo saved until after Stefan is dead (Jonathan_S presents a more interesting case); the law is clear, first the embryo is property of the estate and Georgia has no legal right to it (unless mentioned in a will) and second as property the new Earl can have it destroyed. Unless mentioned in Stefan's will the embryo cannot legally be born without the consent of the new Earl, which makes it illegitimate. Interestingly, I expect that if the new Earl does have the embryo born as a child, that child will be treated as the heir of the new Earl and not as a replacement.

You might point out that under the latest Supreme Court ruling and expected changes to laws in certain states, that an embryo might be legally declared a person. Companies that store embryos are taking steps to move them to states where that will not be true, because of concerns that destroying excess or unwanted embryos will bring charges of abortion.

Jonathan_S wrote:

cthia wrote:I think you missed the first of a double post. If she inseminated herself with Stefan's sperm while he was alive, and had the child tubed, then the child was conceived while the father was alive.

Seemingly only true if the tubing was allowed to continue uninterrupted -- IOW completing in under 9 months from his death. (Not that Stefan is dead yet - just retired in seclusion after the destruction of his home and disappearance of his wife [or at least so says House of Steel])

Also as some point he'd presumably be able to get a divorce from his long missing wife -- assuming she wasn't declared presumed dead first. And after that point any child she conceives, unfreezes, etc. with him or his genetics wouldn't be a legitimate one; as they'd no longer be married.


So she'd have to sneak back into Manticore while still his wofe, without running afoul of the law or the Ballroom, get impregnated, arrange for Stefan to die, and then try to claim temporary control of the Earldom in the name of their child.

Seems unlikely to work. And definitely doesn't seem like the kind of story that RFC would write.

You also forgot updating Stefan's will to include the newly created child. Inheritance for non-nobility is basically a daily thing, you don't have anything special except to family and close friends. Nobility on the other hand, have to think in dynastic terms, so everything's gotta be in the will.

What cthia is suggesting is literally "date rape on steroids". If Georgia had drugged Stefan drugged and stole his sperm, she could conceive a child with his DNA and somehow that's legitimate even though Stefan has ZERO clue it happened, as long as it occurs prior to his death (or let's be honest, it would be a murder not passing away on his own).


Young noble males would need to be guarded more closely than the Queen (now Empress) of Manticore purely because as males, it's far simpler to drug and steal their sperm to impregnate a female to steal their title(s); that doing a similar thing to a young noble female could ever be.

What could you do steal an egg (or inject sperm) and then... what would you keep her imprisoned until she conceives? If you let her go free, within 2 months she'd know she was pregnant, guess what happened, and have the child terminated. If she's pro-life rather than pro-choice, she'd have that rape-baby tubed instead and then specifically declare it illegitimate and unable to inherit her title.


That's why my original comments pointed out, even though Manticore doesn't recognize bastardy and you'll always be able to claim such-and-such person as your father or mother, you certainly CAN be excluded from inheritance. Stefan must be aware of a child, and update his will of his own volition, for Georgia to try and sneak back into the North Hollow line. Every day that passes it becomes more and more difficult, because she's already been missing for 5 to 6 T-years so surely she must be presumed dead which nullifies any marriage state.

Somtaaw wrote:You also forgot updating Stefan's will to include the newly created child. Inheritance for non-nobility is basically a daily thing, you don't have anything special except to family and close friends. Nobility on the other hand, have to think in dynastic terms, so everything's gotta be in the will.

I think that's generally wrong. In general the rules of noble inheritance are beyond the influence or control of the current title holder or their will. And that does seem to be the case in Manticore as well. (Though I admit we haven't seen anything either way about whether a noble can unilaterally disinherit someone; much less do so in their will)

The laws of the land spell out how a title will be inherited and how to trace through the family tree to find the current heir. The noble, and their will, have no influence on that.

So there's generally no need, and no point, to specify an heir to the title (or any entailed lands, property, or moneys) in the will because the law of the land preempts that. (Either it's redundant because you've listed the same person specified by law; or it's pointless because the situation has changed and you've listed the wrong person and thus that listing is void)


The creation of a posthumous child/clone isn't really an exception to that. What the will specifies is a) the deceased wishes such a child or clone to be created and b) recognizes them as their legitimate child.

At that point the normal laws controlling inheritance kick in and if that child/clone is their firstborn (or oldest surviving) child then they are the heir and inherit. If they are not then they do not inherit and nothing in the will can change that.