2009 January 11 Sunday
Surgeon Wants Kidney Back From Cheating Wife

A surgeon wants his kidney back or $1.3 million from his cheating wife.

Dr. Richard Batista of Long Island, N.Y., didn't chop off his right arm for his ailing wife, but he did something many would consider equally noble: He gave up a kidney to her when she needed one in 2001.

How did Dawnell Batista repay this remarkably selfless expression of his love?

According to Dr. Batista and his attorney, she repaid him by having an affair with her physical therapist and filing for divorce.

She also, they claim, locked him out of their million-dollar mansion and denied him access to their three children.

He donated the kidney in 2001. She filed for divorce in 2005. The divorce proceedings still are not settled.

What is needed: genetic testing and brain scanning technology that'll give a person insight into the depth of the bond that another person has for them.

He feels betrayed. No kidding.

"I feel humbled and betrayed and disregarded. This divorce is killing me."

He probably thought his status as a surgeon made him too attractive to a woman to be treated like this. Er, no.

Update Also see Roissy on the surgeon whose ex-wife has his kidney. Says the always provocative Roissy "Like an innocent beta lamb to the slaughter."

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2009 January 11 09:34 AM  Cultural Wars Marriage

miles said at January 11, 2009 7:02 PM:

Our divorce and child support laws REWARD this behavior by women.

She CHEATED, therefore she should LOSE the kids and get NO child support, and NO spousal support.

If this were the law, I'd be she could keep her legs together.

Think about the effect on men if the roles were reversed. If you as a man with three children were REWARDED with custody and 40% of HER income and got the house, the car, half HER Roth IRA or 401K if YOU cheated. Hell, its like hitting the damned lottery.
Tired of the same ol' same ol', well then just start banging that secretary who always flirts with you, who cares if you get caught, what do you have to lose? Nothing.

You can even claim that she called you a "dickhead" or something and claim that its "verbal assault" and that she badgered you for sex during the marriage and that you felt "coerced" and all of that tripe. You'll just get more of HER money.

You think more men would cheat and cash out of their marriages if THESE were the rules?

Yeah, me too. Tons of us.

It will never be right until these non-sensical laws are repealed, but those who put them in place did it to wreck our birthrate, and its done a fine job of that.

Kenneth Stevens said at January 11, 2009 7:18 PM:

Somewhere in this mess there's a really great idea for a horror screenplay...

Wolf-Dog said at January 12, 2009 11:35 AM:

"Our divorce and child support laws REWARD this behavior by women.

She CHEATED, therefore she should LOSE the kids and get NO child support, and NO spousal support.

If this were the law, I'd be she could keep her legs together. "

If this were the law, maybe she would have pretended to be loyal, but in essence she would have indirectly undermined her husband piece by piece in the long run. THIS kind of character does not change, and therefore I disagree because the husband was LUCKY that this woman actually left him: Staying with this kind of woman would have been toxic for his life in the long run. He is still relatively young (49), he still has a remarkably successful and resilient career even if he loses half of his money and his house, and he can find a spiritually compatible lady within a few years.

Moreover, this kind of situation is much more frequent, I was told by a person who experienced this in his family. Many years ago, in California a famous surgeon lost ALL of his retirement account and most of his money to his wife who was having an affair, because a feminist judge was in charge of the case at that time. But in the end, it was still better to divorce and lose all the money instead of staying with this kind of spouse.

Jerry Martinson said at January 13, 2009 12:14 AM:


Do you know which case in California that was? I'd like to read about it since I keep hearing a bunch of guys recently saying that they'll never get married because of fear of this stuff. Lack of marriage and screwed up paternity laws can potentially cause less kids to be born which I think is very bad for our countries future. Judges should take this stuff into account.

Generally in most of California they use the same formula devised by a Santa Clara judge long ago as a starting point. I personally think the formula kind of sucks but I think there's often more than one party at "fault" in most divorces. I'm glad that I'll probably never have to go through this crap. I guess the best advice is to marry someone who makes about the same amount of money as you do if you want to avoid this stuff. But I can imagine that it gets really complicated when people have complex assets, one party started blowing money on stupid crap, or if there's a compelling case for a lump-sump as opposed to long-term maintenance. But I'm sure there are some real nutters on the bench as you say.

Wolf-Dog said at January 13, 2009 5:01 AM:

A friend of mine told me about this event that happened to one of his relatives, but sorry it would be an invasion of privacy to mention specific names. However, this was a famous case. I was told that at some top Ivy League school, this case was actually studied as part of the curriculum, since the judge's decision was Kafkaesque, and all the retirement account of the husband was given to the ex-wife.

But some wealthy friends have already indicated that they cannot get married, not only because they are afraid of losing their money in a divorce, but more concretely, they are aware that they are attracting women who are interested in their money. The knowledge that you are married with a spouse who chose you because of your money, is rather uncomfortable even if this person is behaving in a korrekt way.

However, this can be the end of the American empire, because as noted above, a lot of upper class (therefore high IQ) people will not get have children due their fear of losing their wealth. The Roman Empire collapsed primarily because the ruling upper class actually practiced birth control (at that time this was due to their hedonism, but not so much due to their fear of losing their money in a divorce, but the net effect was the reduction of intelligent people qualified to govern the Roman Empire.)

In any case, one of the funniest movies about people getting married to steal the money of their spouse, was "Intolerable Cruelty":

Jerry Martinson said at January 13, 2009 8:41 AM:

Perhaps marriage should be replaced with a child-raising contract and statues should strike down the notion of common-law marriage. That way people can be free agents. I wonder how this would affect the kids.

Philip B. Harewood, Sr. said at December 24, 2009 9:08 AM:

In 2004 I had Posterior Cervical Laminectomy surgery that left me in constant pain that persist today. In 2005 I found out I had prostate cancer. At that same time my wife left me and started (openly) dating the pastor of our church. He left his wife at the same time. We had three kids so I now pay her 1300 dollars a month in child support. She married the pastor and they bought a new 4 bedroom home in Miamisburg, OH and 3 cars. They are living well with my 1300 dollar additional income when I barley survive. I also split the cost of clothes and school supplies (she pays with the child support money). I only do this because I refuse to not let my kids go without so I pay in addition to my child support. Of course I also pay for all their health needs and since they are with me half of the year (alternating two weeks each) I pay the expenses there. It is obvious to me that something is seriously wrong with this picture, but there is nothing I can do about it. I have faced possible layoff every year since 1999. Fortunately that has not happened yet. Well what can I say that's my story. It's a sick world we live in.

Post a comment
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
Remember info?

Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright