How much consent is needed though? IIRC Cline said in most cases that the sperm was from a medical intern. Given that he was not a medical intern, this is a lie which arguably negates consent.

Other possibilities get more murky; given that frozen sperm was not yet a solved problem, it's clear that the donor would be nearby, so what if Cline had instead said that the sperm was "From someone who works in this office" that would be factually true, if misleading. What if he didn't claim any particular source for the sperm at all?

I don't think there's a crime called "impregnating a woman without consent". Not only that, he also had consent to impregnate her. The question is about where the sperm came from, but I think it's rather unclear that this would be any kind of legal violation.

How is using sperm a patient didn’t consent to not assault?

I agree it's wrong, but assault usual implies a physical attack (or, more specifically, the threat thereof). I'm not sure this qualifies; it may be a situation where laws need tweaking to keep up with the times. Certainly malpractice, though.

The definition of sexual assault is not limited to physical battery alone.

It’s a physical attack, it’s literally inserting a baby into someone under conditions that were not consented to.

Repeating that's it's assault doesn't just make it assault. How do you know what the conditions anyone signed were? Just gleaming an opinion from a headline?

Did she explicitly consent to a specific persons sperm? Cuz if not then your entire sentence is bs.