Man who gave wife his kidney demanded she return it or pay $1.5 million after she filed for divorce

Written By Bakes

Avid writer on Men's Hair, Grooming, and Lifestyle!

Sharing is caring!

Divorce can turn bitter and ugly.

One man took the hostility to an extreme after his wife began divorce proceedings.

Most splits focus on the house or child custody.

This case involved something far more personal.

Dr Richard Batista had donated one of his kidneys to his wife.

He later demanded the organ back or sought payment.

The demand was for $1.5 million.

The couple had married in 1990 and raised three children together.

Dr Batista said marital strain stemmed from his wife’s health problems.

After two failed kidney transplants, he gave her a kidney in 2001.

He told reporters at the time: “My first priority was to save her life. The second bonus was to turn the marriage around.”

The transplant did save his wife’s life.

But the hoped-for reconciliation did not happen.

Dawnell filed for divorce in 2005.

Dr Batista accused her of having an affair.

He then included an extraordinary demand in the divorce papers.

He wanted the kidney returned or $1.5 million in compensation.

His lawyer, Dominic Barbara, said his client was ‘asking for the value of the kidney’.

Lawyers and medical ethicists said the claim had no legal basis.

Medical ethicist Robert Veatch warned against the idea.

He said: “It’s her kidney now and … taking the kidney out would mean she would have to go on dialysis or it would kill her.”

Unsurprisingly, Dr Batista did not get the kidney or the money.

The Nassau County Supreme Court dismissed his claim in a detailed ruling.

Matrimonial referee Jeffrey Grob wrote: “The defendant’s effort to pursue and extract monetary compensation therefore not only runs afoul of the statutory prescription, but conceivably may expose the defendant to criminal prosecution.”

In the United States, donated organs are treated as gifts under the law.

The rule exists to stop people selling organs for profit.

Batista’s demand still caught attention for its surreal nature.

Dawnell’s attorney, Douglas Rothkopf, responded to the ruling.

He said: “We are pleased with the decision.

“Human organs are not commodities that can be bought or sold.”