Sherri Shepherd will have to pay child support for the kid she never wanted


Even though I covered some of Sherri Shepherd’s divorce drama last year and there was some interest in it, I kind of tapped out at some point because the drama was messy, ugly and complicated. The basic gist… Sherri was married to Lamar Sally, who may or may not have been a massive golddigger. Lamar wanted a kid and Sherri was like “Ugh, maybe.” Lamar arranged for a surrogate and while the surrogate was gestating their child, Lamar filed for separation/divorce. Sherri filed paperwork with the court saying she never really wanted the kid and she had no interest in A) raising the baby and B) paying child support to Lamar for this child she never wanted. Well, now the divorce has been finalized and in a unique legal decision, Sherri is going to pay child support for the baby… but only if she can’t prove that Lamar defrauded her.

Sherri Shepherd’s nasty divorce and custody battle is finally over … and stunningly, she has agreed to pay child support for the kid she disavowed from birth … but with a catch.

Our sources say, Sherri and estranged hubby Lamar Sally have struck a settlement agreement in which the ex-‘View’ co-host will pay $4,100 a month in child support. The monthly obligation increases to $4,600 when the kid turns 13.

Remember, Sherri fought Lamar tooth and nail in court, claiming he defrauded her into getting a surrogate to carry a baby for the purpose of getting child support.

Now for the catch. According to the settlement agreement, Sherri is allowed to pursue her fraud claim and if the appeals court rules in her favor, her child support obligations will disappear. And there’s a Sofia Vergara twist … the couple has embryos in storage and Sherri wants them destroyed. Lamar is undecided. According to the settlement, if Lamar chooses to bring the embryos to term, Sherri will not have to pay child support.

Sherri’s not walking away completely empty-handed … she’ll get to hold onto the rights to her show, “Funny Mothers” which is currently in development.

[From TMZ]

I actually feel sorry for Sherri Shepherd a little bit, just as I feel sorry for Sofia Vergara. It’s a brave new world for men using surrogacy and frozen embryos for emotional and financial manipulation. And while I think the chances are pretty good that Lamar Sally’s endgame was always Sherri’s cash-money, I think the court and the lawyers came up with the best possible solution. I mean, Sherri did – at one point – want to have a child with Lamar Sally and once the embryo was implanted, there was no takesies-backsies. So now all Sherri needs to do is prove Lamar’s fraud. Can she do it?


Photos courtesy of WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

100 Responses to “Sherri Shepherd will have to pay child support for the kid she never wanted”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. EM says:

    Wow. I’ve never really liked Sherri (on The View) and now I dislike her even more. To even put it down on legal documents that you’ve never wanted the child? What is that going to do to that child at a later date?
    There are always risks with surrogates. Things can always go awry, but once a pregnancy has shifted beyond that 3 month period and progresses, the reality is that a child will be born and adults who make these arrangements should realise their obligations. No, I don’t feel sorry for Sherri. I feel sorry for this poor child.
    It’s not ‘just the men’ here, the women have consented and have provided their eggs and in cases where they’ve have successful fertilisation to go on to develop into embryos, both parties are to blame. Let’s not get carried away here and dismiss the woman’s contribution and make it a ‘male thing’. It takes sperm and ova to create an embryo.
    These women should not have agreed to enter such agreements. It’s that simple. But once they agree and proceed, it’s their responsibility.
    We are currently living in a pathetic world where women and men use surrogates, then dehumanise them and call them ‘gestational carriers’, like they’re the next handbag, and then some people – upon realising they can’t afford a child or whatever else – may feel as though they can abandon the child, as has happened in countries like India and Thailand.

    • Santia says:

      I agree with most of what you said, except that Sheri did not provide any eggs. Her eggs weren’t viable. This is Lamar Sally’s kid. Period. While the poor kid will ultimately find out that Sheri never wanted him; the odds are that Sheri won’t have a relationship with the kid. She’s just paying Lamar Sally gratuitous child support for a child that is not hers. Lamar wants him and he has him. Further, the grifter will have child support for 18 years for a child that HE should rightfully support.

      • EM says:

        But she consented and agreed to whatever arrangement they had. It seems as though you don’t have to provide the genetic material, if there is an additional contractual arrangement.
        Technically, even if you provide the genetic material to another surrogate, that child is the surrogate’s. I’m not sure about American law, but here where I live, when that child is born, the child [even if it has the genetic material from other parents] has to be adopted by the biological parent for the child to be that biological parent’s. So maybe Sherri would have been better off if she lived where I lived. But in this instance, she has to follow the law. Child support is always calculated according to salaries earned. If her ex husband shows that he isn’t earning much and she is earning more, then she is lumbered with it. She should have been more careful.

      • nicole says:

        These people are both reprehensible. It shouldn’t matter that it’s not her dna. She presumably agreed to this and they set up the surrogacy. The kid was born. When you adopt a kid and later leave the picture you still owe child support. The gestational carrier is providing a service and shouldn’t be on the hook for a child that two people essentially decided to create.

        I’m lucky to live in a jurisdiction that has turned their minds to things like this as it will only become more common.

      • KellyBee says:

        That’s not completely true Sherri signed documents after documents saying that she will be the mother and will be responsible as the mother.

        Just like if a couple adopts and then split the parent that earns more money will be the one responsible to pay child support. One parent can’t say the child’s not biologically mine so I don’t want anything to do with it so I don’t want to have to pay child support, it doesn’t work that way.

      • Miss Jupitero says:

        People use donor eggs, donor sperm, and surrogates all the time and the kids are still theirs, and they are responsible. If she agreed to this arrangement, met with the IVF people and so on, then I can’t see how she can get out of this.

        The only scenario I can picture in which she could legitimately get out of paying child support would be if all of this happened without *any* involvement or agreement on her part, completely behind her back. Is that even possible? But even then, any conception happening within the marriage complicates things. Otherwise men could just get away with saying “Oh, I never wanted this child, so I don’t have to support him or her.”

      • lucy2 says:

        Agree with the others, if she signed papers saying she would be the parent and was active in the decision to proceed with a donor and surrogate, regardless of biology, she’s as responsible as he is.

      • delorb says:

        The problem is that she agreed thinking he loved her and wanted to raise the child with her. But the minute the fetus was viable he served her with papers. Which seems to indicate that he only wanted this baby to get at her purse. Then there is the gossip that the surrogate wasn’t some random woman, but was someone he was in a long-term relationship with. So its his sperm, the surrogates eggs and Sherri’s money. He comes off as a grifter who put a long con plan in motion. A plan Sherri didn’t see coming.

      • Tristan says:

        Sorry but she was totally set up & decieved by that ghastly gold digger. The entire scam was dreamt up by him & his ex, who’s ova were used. Why should she have any interest in a child which was created for the sole purpose to rip her off. She is absolutely right to want nothing to do with that awful fraudster

      • CatFoodJunkie says:

        It’s very much like when a woman has a baby with a rich man, whether love or marriage was involved, she is set for a good 18 years on high child support payments. These stories abound. Whether or not it’s Sherri’s dna in that child is irrelevant — she acted in a manor which was meant to and did result in a child. Period. Pay up, Sherri. A travesty if she was conned, but it’s not like she’s the only woman to have a baby with a man and then find out it isn’t going to work.

      • qwerty says:

        But in the case you’re describing it’s his bio child, so of course he’s gonna pay. In this case, it’s his bio kid and according to some stories, his ex (possibly even current) lover.

    • Sarah says:

      Exactly. I don’t think this is anything like Vergara’s situation. Kaiser, you have been emphasizing Vergara’s “contract” related to the embryos and how that makes clear what should happen. Well, tit for tat. Shepard signed a contract too. Put her name on a paper saying that she would be the mother of this child. You don’t just get to say “oops” I changed my mind when that happens. So now, this poor kid has a dad who may or may not be a gold digger and a horror for a mother who says in writing that she never wanted it. Ugh….

    • cujokay says:

      What are you babbling about? Sherri is in no way PHYSICALLY related to the child. Her ex provided sperm; it’s his kid biologically.

      Sherri has been saying from the beginning that Lamar tricked her in order to set himself up with child support payments. That is exactly what is happening. How would any of us know if it’s true one way or the other. The courts gave Sherri the right to sue for fraud. If fraud is proven, the child support payments would cease.

      In any event I think people should wait the result of the court case before pointing fingers and acting like we know exactly what went down, what is going down or what may be going down in the future. Remember, WE KNOW NOTHING!

      Give them both a break until we do.

      • Sabrine says:

        The issue is that Sally dumped her once the deal was sealed and there was a baby on the way. It’s fraud, and he did it so he could finance his future. Apparently he only had $30 K in the bank so he desperately needed to feather his nest. That is why Sherri is taking him to trial because he is a greedy opportunist who had a game plan to benefit from child support payments to support him for the next 20 years.

      • Bridget says:

        Isn’t that a risk you take in choosing to have a child with someone? If the tables were turned and a woman got pregnant and then dumped her spouse once child support payments were imminent, would we consider that fraud?

        I don’t doubt that there was something shady about Lamar Sally. But that baby is Sherri’s, whether or not her biological material was used.

      • Sherry says:

        I was on Sherry’s side of this until I read Bridget’s comment above. I do still believe her ex manipulated and used her to gain financially and that was his end-game all along. However, if the situation were reversed and a woman intentionally got pregnant with a wealthy man’s child in order to gain financially ::::cough:::::Oksana Grigorieva:::::cough::::: wouldn’t we all expect him to step up and take care of his child?

        The ex may be a major-league douchebag, but Sherry signed papers expecting to become a mother. This baby had nothing to do with the ex’s manipulation. He is innocent in all of this.

      • Bridget says:

        It also doesn’t matter if she isn’t physically related to the kid – LEGALLY that child is hers.

      • Pinky says:

        @Briget and @Sherry
        But that’s not exactly equivalent. What WOULD be equivalent, is if a woman got her husband to agree to use a donor’s sperm to get her pregnant, and that donor’s sperm turned out to be that of her ex-lover. And once she got pregnant with the kid, filed for sole custody of the child and for divorce. (And maybe tried to get back together with the ex.) It’s really slippery, tricky, and suspect.

      • Bridget says:

        I’m not denying that it’s icky. BUT Sherri was very much a part of the process and willingly went through with it, and that included jumping through the legal hoops. It doesn’t matter if the prospective parents made a bad choice in the donor of their genetic material, it’s still legally BOTH their kid.

        And honestly, if it’s a con, it’s the strangest con I’ve heard. I could be entirely wrong, but I would imagine that the only way Sherri will get out of paying child support is if it turns out that the surrogate wasn’t actually implanted to begin with, but that the pregnancy came about the old fashioned way.

      • delorb says:


        That’s why most cons work. Its beyond the realm of most people think of grifting people. It reminds me of those women and men who marry people just because they’re setting them up for the insurance. It sounds farfetched because most people don’t think that way. Makes it easier to deny the allegations and get away with it.

        In this case I think that all she has to prove is that he had a prior sexual relationship with the surrogate.

      • Bridget says:

        I meant more along the lines of the fact that I’m unsure how the con would even work. It would be dependent on Sherri not wanting to keep the baby and be forced to pay child support. If she had full custody HE would have to pay HER child support, after all. It seems like a huge gamble. To me it seemed like he was hoping to have a kid and then get to stay home as a kept man/caretaker. Marrying someone for the insurance I get 🙂

        Also, I think a lot hinges on the state’s rules when it comes to egg donation and surrogacy, as certain things are acceptable in different states. So I don’t know whether a prior sexual relationship would invalidate the contract, though I would think that it would have come up with all the Internet legal experts.

  2. Tiffany says:

    It is things like this why laws have to catch up things like modern science. I mean, the judge and attorneys cannot make it up as they go along.

    • boredblond says:

      +1..this case and the Sophia V debacle both bring up holes in the current laws, but it’s hard to legislate with so many emotional factors at play.. . no winners all around.

      • ol cranky says:

        in Sophia V’s case though, the contract covered the details that aren’t addressed by current law; their contract requires both partners to agree to implant or destroy the embryos for any action to be taken with them

    • Katie says:

      Exactly what I was thinking. If the eggs weren’t hers,meow can a judge honestly order her to support the child? Although I suppose opening that door could create a whole mess of problems for adoptive parents too.

      • denisemich says:

        I thought any child conceived during a marriage determines instant parentage. In the past, a man had to prove the kid wasn’t his through genetic testing.

        I feel bad for Sherri and the kid. Lamar defrauded her.I wonder if Lamar will want the baby if Sherri proves her case and no cash comes in.

      • Bridget says:

        People have been using donor eggs for a long time, and case law has already been established determining the rights and responsibilities when it comes to using donor eggs. Lamar and Sherri may have used someone else’s genetic material, but that child is THEIRS, and that life was created as a direct result of their choice to proceed with the surrogacy. Sherri would have had to sign a thorough contract on the subject, so that is definitely her child, regardless of who the donor eggs came from.

      • Sarah says:

        The only difference is desire. As you said – this would open a can of worms for adoption as well. My son is adopted. Let’s say his dad and I divorce and suddenly dad doesn’t want to pay child support because the child isn’t his biologically. Is that OK? No, because there was an adoption agreement, just like there was a surrogacy contract. This isn’t about parental rights and responsibilities as much as it is about contract law.

    • LAK says:

      one can’t legislate ahead of time for every single variation of every single situation humans contrive to be in. Lawmakers aren’t psychic nor are they able to see into the future.

      Once a situation has been created, THEN it’s presents an opportunity for legislation, not before.

  3. tracking says:

    Sad situation. Yes, she agreed to the surrogacy and is therefore obligated to the child. But I hope she can prove fraud; I suspect it’s true. But the poor kid, regardless. I doubt he saw the child as anything other than a meal ticket.

  4. Mia4S says:

    What a miserable existence for that child, particularly if fraud is proven.

    Well ladies we have some thinking to do. For years men have paid support for kids they didn’t want; now it can happen to us too. Proceed with caution. Strange new world.

    • AcidRock says:

      This was the first thing that crossed my mind as well. Many times a man has been “caught up” for child support for a kid he never wanted, but of course he has zero say in whether the woman actually carries to full-term, and he’s stuck for the next 18 years. It’s a new era when this scenario can go the other way.

      • Montrealise says:

        Exactly. How many men have said ‘She lied and said she was using birth control’ or ‘I never wanted or expected to have a kid with this woman’? The courts’ reply is invariably ‘Tough luck, you still have to pay child support’. And how many women have gotten pregnant by a rich man solely to get generous child support payments for the next 18 years? The men in that scenario can’t get out of paying child support by claiming they were tricked and defrauded, even though they were. This is what equality looks like, Sherri.

      • carol says:

        @montrealise – well said!!

      • delorb says:

        Except the children are biologically theirs. Its why each and every one of them get a DNA test. The only way this would be remotely similar to some man sleeping with someone who lied about birth control, is if Lamar lied to Sherry about having a vasectomy and she got pregnant.

        But, she didn’t get pregnant. She agreed to have a child with him via a surrogate that she had no idea he was already in a relationship with*. This way he gets a baby with his ‘true’ love and gets paid by Sherry. He should have spent the money and used a real surrogate, that way she wouldn’t have a case. Cheap bastard. LOL

        *If the gossip is to be believed.

    • Elly says:

      and not forget the “milkman´s children”. I don´t know how it is in the USA but in Germany a man has to pay for a child even when it´s not his biological child. All that counts is that the man was legally married to the mother when the kid was born. The husband is always the father before the law. Men can do nothing against it. Only the mother has the power to set him free. She can acknowledge another man as the father or say there is no father.
      Without the mother´s permission the “father” isn´t even allowed to do a paternity test. If he does one in secret he breaks the law and can get fined.

      • Norman Bates' Mother says:

        I’ve never heard about such a law Elly. Where I live, once the paternity test proves a child was fathered by a different man (and fathers have a right to ask for it without mother’s consent), the husband is free to go and never look back. I believe it’s the same in most of the US, but some states make it more complicated (time windows et al.) than others. Having a law like this in existence gives gold-diggers unlimited options to use their husbands whichever way they want. For once a law that is completely unfair and unequal towards men.

      • Valois says:

        I’m afraid you’re not entirely correct.
        Women cannot refuse to name the father (BVerfG ruling). And men can do something against it, it’s called Vaterschaftsanfechtung.

      • crtb says:

        I saw a TV show in which a couple both Caucasian had a black child. It was proven that he was not the father ( he was in the service and was not even in the country when she became pregnant) but the courts forced him to pay child support because he was married to the wife at the time. He appealed the decision several times and each time the courts stated that he was considered the biological father regardless to evidence otherwise. And that he had to pay child support until the child was 18. The woman went on to divorce him and marry the “real” father. So this poor guy is paying for a child whom his wife had while cheating on him.

    • Susiecue says:

      It is SUCH a strange new world. Just think, if she were actually pregnant she would have the choice to terminate it…I wonder what kind of say the surrogate has in the termination of the pregnancy? And it is very sad that just because the love is gone between her and her ex, so is her love for the child she must have wanted at some point. I get it, but still–sad.

  5. Wren33 says:

    I feel bad for her, but I say the same thing when I talk about men being bitter about child support payments – it is what is in the best interest of the child, and nothing to do with the intentions of the parents or their relationship. Of course, with surrogacy it gets very complicated, as she has no biological link to the child and disavowed it before it was born, but certainly the surrogate mother shouldn’t have to be financially responsible for it and I imagine the court is going to want to find two people who are ultimately responsible.

    • The Other Katherine says:

      The surrogate has the same right to terminate her pregnancy as any other woman (varying significantly from state to state in the U.S., of course). However, she might then be liable for damages under the terms of the contract she signed agreeing to carry the child.

  6. minx says:

    Seems that Sherri didn’t do due diligence on this guy before she got entangled with him. She should have.

    • Santia says:

      If you followed Sheri before all this (I admit I was a fan, especially from 30 Rock and Everyone Loves Raymond), you will see that she was very desperate to “find love” and get married. Her first husband cheated on her and had a kid with one of her close friends WHILE he was married to Sheri. She still took him back and accepted the side kid. When they ultimately divorced, she was out looking to marry anything that moved. Sadly, someone like Lamar Sally was exactly was she was going to end up with.

  7. nicole says:

    I don’t feel bad for her. It’s unique because she didn’t carry the child, but if she had and they broke up and he said “forget about me wanting this baby” there would be no question that he owed child support no matter how much he didn’t want the baby and how shady her intentions may have been. If you start the process you need to be prepared for this. Child support is the right of the child, not of the entitled jerks who appear to be using a baby as a legal pawn.

    I don’t know how it could ever be considered fraud and I think that’s dangerous. I’m sure a ton of a- hole deadbeat dad’s or mom’s would love to say “I agreed to sex and the baby cuz you said we’d be together forever and now you dumped me. That was a lie and fraud. It’s only your kid now and I don’t have to pay”. That would be horrible for family law and not in line with the principles at all.

    Sorry, apparently I have feelings about this!

    • MrsB says:

      Agree. The baby has her DNA, she should help support the baby. As you said, women have babies all the time that men don’t want. Yet, the men still have to pay child support (as they should). I can’t help but wonder if the situations were reversed and Sherri wanted the baby and he didn’t, if people would feel sympathy for him. I have zero sympathy for her.

      Edit: reading some of the comments up thread, it seems that her eggs weren’t used? That changes things a little bit I think.

      • nicole says:

        I don’t think it should matter that it’s not her genetic material. Unless it was a truly bizarre situation where he set up a surrogacy with his dna with a surrogate behind her back, her having no input or knowledge, and then leaving her and saying “a ha! I’m having a baby and it’s half yours just like the rest of our stuff! Bahahaha, I’m insane”, then she was part of it. If she contracted and agreeed and participated then she should be responsible.

        I really don’t think people would have any sympathy if the roles were reversed. Imagine if a lady got pregnant with a sperm donor due to her partners unviable sperm. Then he left and was like “not mine”. Horrible. Or a lesbian couple where they both decide to have a baby and one is pregnant and the other leaves and deniess any obligation. Or a gay couple, surrogacy and sperm. It’s about the intention I think and who is bringing the kid into the world, not the genetic details.

      • Macey says:

        Technically it does NOT have her DNA, her eggs were not viable.

        Rumor is the surrogate is Lamar’s mistress and she was being conned the entire time. I’m really not familiar with Sherri outside of this story but I feel for her if he was setting her up the entire time. Hopefully she can prove it. I dont think it’s fair to her or the child if she was conned into this under false pretenses. If that is the case the Lamar and his mistress can support the child.

      • MrsB says:

        The only reason I said it changes things is I think it opens up the idea that it could have been fraud. Is it possible he set up the surrogacy without her knowing about it?

        If there is any proof showing that she was in on the surrogacy, she should absolutely pay up. Making a baby, and then deciding halfway through you don’t want it anymore should not absolve you of the responsibility. Poor child that will one day be able to read in court papers that his/her mother did not want him/her. Sad! Honestly, can’t believe anybody feels sorry for her.

      • Judy says:

        The baby does not have her DNA. The surrogate is his ex-girlfriend. And I believe I read that it’s the ex’s eggs too. My recollection is that Sherri thought the surrogate was a platonic friend of Lamar’s. She found out later that the surrogate was his ex. Some articles have even said that the surrogate is his mistress and not an ex. Seems like this is straight up fraud by her ex-Lamar Sally, which is why the courts is giving her a chance to try to prove the fraud allegation.

      • Bridget says:

        There’s no question about whether or not Sherri knew about the surrogacy. She signed the papers and went through the legal hoops – her genetic material or not, that baby is hers.

        Sherri is accusing Lamar and the surrogate of cooking up a plot to have Sherri pay for the baby and then have Lamar and the surrogate run off into the sunset together. There’s some sort of accusation of the surrogate being an ex/current lover of his.

    • cheryl says:

      I think fraud is a very realistic supposition here. HE dumped her. The timing is pretty convenient to him, the identity of the surrogate also convenient, the DNA of the child also strangely, convenient. It seems to be a case of HIM bringing a child into the world by stringing her along, knowing he had zero intention of being her life partner.

      • Bridget says:

        But is wanting a baby for child support considered fraud? It’s tacky and heartless, but fraudulent? It isn’t as though Sally and the surrogate could just abscond with the baby and the child support checks.

    • Aren says:

      “Child support is the right of the child”, I agree with this so much and was going to say she should pay, but after reading that the guy arranged to have a baby with his mistress AND make Sherri pay for it, that’s a crime.
      Then again, I heard of a guy who adopted his fianceés’s daughter, a few weeks later the woman broke up with him and now he has to pay child support.

    • crtb says:


  8. QQ says:

    Time and again I keep thinking about this poor perfectly normal unwanted by his own bio and carrier Mamas, and apparently a money foothold for dad… Like HOW can this play out in his life in absolutely any other way that NEGATIVE AS FUUUUUUUUUU*K

  9. PunkyMomma says:

    I’m confused – is this innocent child biologically Sherri Shepherd’s?

  10. NEHA says:

    Eh, there are a lot of men out there paying child support for a kid they never wanted. I don’t really have any sympathy for them and I don’t really have any sympathy for Sherri.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      I have to agree. If she were a man, we would all be saying tough sh$t.

      • Bellakitty says:

        If this was a tue reverse situation I feel that we would not be saying who gives a crap. If the situation was her eggs and her her ex/current lover sperm, we would expect them to take care of the child financially and not him. However, it was not her eggs…it was his sperm and his ex lover or possibly current lover, supposedly, and he asked for the divorce as soon as the pregnancy was viable. To me and those who work in the same legal office as I, feel this screams of fraud. I hope she can prove it, TBH.

  11. Freebunny says:

    What a mess…
    She was okay for the surrogate mother now she has to assume this child.

  12. KellyBee says:

    BS Sherri wanted that baby very much. She always talk about wanting to have another child and the even trying until they found out they couldn’t have baby the traditional way.

    Now I think it is believable that she wasn’t really gung ho about surrogacy in the beginning but if you read interviews from her she was so happy about the baby. It was only until Lamar showed his true colors that she started to treat this innocent baby I a unwanted pair of shoes that you regret buying.

    The only victim in my eyes is that innocent little boy. I hope he never reads any of this mess and is loved.

  13. bettyrose says:

    Fascinating to see a complete break down of gender roles but that doesn’t make it okay. Still, donating an egg requires forethought. It’s a little different than a pin-pricked condom, but how can the egg be implanted in a surrogate without her permission? Is that legal?

    • Mia4S says:

      Not her eggs. She has zero biological relation to the child. Legally this is very grey territory.

      • FingerBinger says:

        It’s not really grey territory. If the marriage didn’t break down she would have been taking care of a child that wasn’t biologically hers anyway.

    • KellyBee says:

      They had her permission she signed off on everything.

    • bettyrose says:

      Oh okay. I just assumed her eggs since otherwise, WTF? Unless she legally adopted the embryo, how is this her child??

    • Michelle says:

      @FingerBinger – I agree. Just because a relationship fails doesn’t mean you get to abandon the child you agreed to have. This is extremely ugly behavior and a very disturbing story.

  14. cdoggy says:

    So, Brandi Glanville gets $1700 a month child support for two kids but Sherri has to pay $4000 for one she didn’t even want? I don’t understand California child support at all, apparently. WTF?!

    • KellyBee says:

      My guess is that she really makes more money then Eddie which is why her child support is higher. At the end of the day It doesn’t matter whether she wanted the child or not now.

    • Jayna says:

      Brandi has her children half of the month. Eddie has the children equal time. Eddie’s child support is based off of what he makes, which these days is not much, and Brandi makes a lot, or did.

  15. BeefJerky says:

    I thought I read somewhere that the surrogate was even Lamar’s former girlfriend or something. If that’s the case, that’s INCREDIBLY shady, and I think they were just trying to get Sherri’s money.

    • lucy2 says:

      I haven’t heard that, but I did hear that because Sherri tried to walk away from the whole thing, the surrogate’s name was put as the mother on the birth certificate (also not her biological child, I don’t think) and she was actually responsible for paying child support for a while. Hopefully Sherri has to pay back her costs as well.
      Here’s an interesting article on it, and a similar case.

    • Lady D says:

      His former girlfriend and her egg, his sperm and a plan to sit on their ass and let Sherry pay for their child. That poor baby should just come home with me.
      lucy2: Why just Sherry paying the surrogate back?

      • lucy2 says:

        Good point, Lamar should also be equally responsible for any hardship caused to the surrogate. I was thinking Sherri only at first as she tried to walk away from the whole thing, but Lamar had custody of the baby (I think). But if the surrogate had to pay, he and Sherri need to reimburse her.
        What a messy situation all around.

  16. Elfie says:

    She shouldn’t have agreed to the surrogacy if she didn’t want to be the mother. Once the surrogate is pregnant it’s too late to change your mind just as a father can’t decide to abandon financial responsibilities to the children they create. Her behaviour is outrageous and there’s no excuse to abandon a child created this way. Surrogacy is no accident, it takes a lot of forethought, time and effort to get into that situation. She made her choices and then refused to take responsibility for them. She’s a disgrace.

    • Lady D says:

      What if it was a set-up between her husband and his ex? What if the court proves fraud? Wasn’t it within days of the pregnancy being announced that he filed for divorce and stated his intent to raise the child while unemployed? What if you thought you planned a child with your partner and then found out they had a different plan and you were just paying the bills? (I don’t mean you personally Elfie)

      • LadyL says:

        Ask men that thought the lady they were sleeping with were on birth control. It’s called child support. Too bad so sad. The kid is more important. And public policy dictates its needs come first. Sorry Sherry- call Patty Stanger. Maybe she can help you do better next time.

    • Michelle says:

      But how could it have been set up by her now exhusband and his ex? Either way, Sherri complied. It is a terrible thing to really just abandon the child. The child is innocent.

  17. MonicaQ says:

    Man, I wish my mother was that upfront about not wanting me. Would’ve saved a lot of money on therapy bills.

  18. Chinoiserie says:

    I do not think this is her child but she should still pay child support since that is what she agreed to do. But she should not have to have contact with the child if she does not want to. Maybe my opinion sounds strange, but she consented for the child support when she signed the papers. But this does not make her a mother in a biological or emotional way since she has (I understand) never met the child. I do not know the US law so I can not say if it would be posibble for her to be legally obligated to give child support but still not be legally the mother. I think that would be vey unlikely but ideal if possible. This is a strange case but unless there really was a fraud she is responsible for her decisons. The surrogacy contract is a contract like any other and the child needs to be supported.

  19. littlestar says:

    I feel sorry for the baby. Lamar and Sherri both sound like sh*tty people.

    • word says:

      I feel sorry for the baby too. I’m not a huge fan of Sherri, especially after the time she spoke of all the abortions she had and made it out like it was no big deal. With regards to this new child…I don’t know. It’s not biologically hers but there must have been some paperwork signed way ahead of the implantation of the egg/sperm into the surrogate. She must have agreed to something as I know there is A LOT of paperwork involved when doing something like this.

      • crtb says:

        She is treating this pregnancy as if it was another one of her many abortions that she got to just walk away from.

  20. Jayna says:

    I do feel sorry for Sherri. The eggs weren’t hers, which wouldn’t matter regarding the scenario of they were going to be both involved in raising the child. Before the surrogate had the baby, he up and left her and he moved back to California immediately (all planned), setting her up for his getting custody since it’s his sperm, living in a different state on the west coast, and her paying child support, a lot, because the man doesn’t work. He wants her to support his lazy a… The baby was the ticket.

    Sherry works full time with a special needs child in school in New Jersey, sometimes two jobs at a time. The bonding with that baby would not be much living on opposite coasts and working and raising her other child. She was screwed. That baby was his cash cow, and she wouldn’t even get the benefit of the baby in her city to help raise it and bond with it. What a mess.

  21. WTF says:

    I think it should hinge on the fraud. If the surrogate mom and this guy are in a relationship, and they used her eggs, then how is that just not their baby, that they should pay for?!? I’ve read that this was his former girlfriend and that the eggs used were the surrogates and not Sherri’s.

    If this is a case of changing her mind after the fact, then of course she should pay.

  22. Bread and Circuses says:

    She looks so great in that blue dress. That is an awesome colour and a very flattering, pretty design.

    As for all the ugly in this story, Imma just gonna ignore that. I hope the child grows up well-loved and supported.

  23. Cinderella says:

    If Sally and his ex schemed to have a baby together at Sherri ‘s expense, that sounds fraudulent to me. If both parties did not enter the agreement in good faith, that may pose a problem for Sally.

  24. CK says:

    Here’s my thoughts on the situation. Sherri should pay. She agreed and signed papers for the child and she shouldn’t be allowed to skip out now that her marriage has failed. As for the whole fraud angle, I don’t think it should matter. Child support is for the well being of the child and since that poor kid did not scheme alongside Sally in utero, I don’t see how his actions should deny the child of the legal support that he/she deserves.

  25. Michelle says:

    IDK, this is way too shady. I don’t think it is fair to compare this situation to the Sofia Vergara one, because in that instance, there are only embryos involved. In this instance, we’re talking about actual human life, and Sherri Shepard agreed to be a part of it. If Sofia Vergara had created a baby and decided to walk away, I think she would be shunned. I am not a believer that life begins at the point of conception, but when we’re dealing with an actual living, breathing baby, I don’t see how this can really be contested. Sheri can’t just walk away from a child because she is walking away from her marriage–she agreed and now she has to follow through.

    This is a hideously ugly situation, though. I can’t imagine growing up knowing that my mother not only openly admitted that she didn’t want me, but also went as far as to fight not to be a part of my life. I believe Sherri is gross for this, and I would absolutely feel the same way if Sofia had agreed to having a baby and then as soon as the baby was born decided “nevermind!”

  26. Jordan says:

    I can’t stand her and still feel a little sorry for her. Mainly because she’s so stupid. No doubt Mr. Sheperd was only in it for the money. That poor kid!

  27. JRenee says:

    Oh yes, certainly seems as Lamar couldn’t wait until the kid was born to get away. Once the mom was past the first trimester he surprised her with the divorce if the rumors are to believed. And yes, the egg was from an ex lover.
    Sherri isn’t the 1st woman to fall in love and find out the man she married was not who she thought. I believe Renee Z. filed for divorce from Kenny C. claiming fraud. The fact of her not having a clue until she was served and hI’m filing for sole custody, YES this grifter pulled a long haul con. 50k annually is salary for some folks. I wish it were a lot less so he’d have to work & contribute something.
    I bet the child will receive love from the egg donor and his dad! I feel sorry for the child. He’s the one who was truly wronged in this sad tale of deception & greed

  28. H says:

    I watch The View everyday, never liked Sherri, but all she talked about was wanting that baby. All the articles I’ve read is that Lamar and Sherri used a DONOR egg, then a gestational carrier. This is the first I’m hearing that the carrier might be a friend/ex of Lamar’s. If it can be proven the baby is Lamar and the ex’s, then Sherri should not pay. However, if that’s all just rumors, then Sherri should step up and take care of the kid that she signed up for. Poor kid.

  29. Jen says:

    I think there’s a side to this most people don’t mention. Even if she agreed to be in the kids life and be it’s mother…she’d be paying child support. He would say he needs x amount of money a month so he can give the kid the same lifestyle that he has at her house. So even if she wanted the kid…he still gets money. So all he had to do was get the kid born. The only way he would lose is if she fought him and took full custody…which wasn’t likely to happen when he knew she actually didn’t totally want it from the start.

  30. Maria_ says:

    I feel sorry for the baby 🙁