AIBU to think sperm donors should consent before each embryo is used?

You don’t think it’s a problem to be deprived of a father? You don’t think fathers bring anything special to a child’s life?

Just because some fathers are absent or useless, doesn’t mean that a child should be intentionally deprived of one.

So, a recipient undergoes a short protocol IVF cycle, which results in one or two low-grade three-day embryos. Her doctor recommends a fresh transfer (at short notice), rather than waiting to see if the embryos reach the blastocyst stage in the lab. Short protocol IVF is unpredictable from a scheduling point of view, so important appointments such as for egg retrieval and embryo transfers sometimes fall on the weekend.

Unfortunately, it's a Saturday and the sperm bank is closed, so no one is available to contact the donor to get permission for the embryo transfer. But even if it had been open, it's unlikely that anyone could have got hold of the donor, as he's currently travelling abroad.

The doctor would probably have to aim for a blastocyst transfer instead, despite the risk that by Monday morning, there might not be any embryos left to transfer. However, even if at least one embryo survives, what if the donor is still out of reach and the embryo is not a high enough grade to be suitable for freezing?

IVF is stressful and there are many points in the process at which it can fail. Requiring a donor to give consent to each embryo transfer would add further stress and uncertainty to the process and I haven't seen any evidence that donors would even want this. After all, would they want the moral responsibility of always being contactable?

At what point would they be asked to consent for implantation? Would the woman have an initial consultation at the clinic and then consent would be sought?

Just on a practical level, it would be excessively cruel to let someone start the hormones and then be told on a potential transfer day that the embryos can't be thawed. Should the donor be given a date for when implantation could happen as this is all down to response and thickness of lining etc and could actually occur on a number of different days. Also IVF is not a guarantee, does the donor have to be contacted to be informed of the progress of every transfer?

I have frozen embryos, made from my eggs and my partner's sperm, he of course had to consent and will have to consent to any transfers because he is biological and legal father to any ensuing child. Is your intended version giving the donor too much information and participation in the process to the point that it might put off future donors who just want to donate and move on with their lives?

So is your argument that donors should be notified on each instance in advance of a transfer?

As for should they be able to remove consent? I think of the embryos have been created then probably not but the law is the law.

1million children - conceived in a male/female relationship- have ZERO contact with their fathers. 3 million children in the U.K. are being brought up in households with no father in them.
Yet Two women in a relationship using a donor is somehow the problem, sure whatever.

No. In reality men dont get a choice about being a father in the 9 month period after after sex. Conception occurs a very short time after the act.

This is many years after they provided the sperm. So its not how it works in reality

that’s exactly how it works in reality. Of course women should be able to abort for any reason (or no reason at all).

But men don’t currently get a choice about being a father - if they don’t want the child then they are still stuck supporting it

So a bloke can force an abortion now??
So in your word, only women can force an abortion on a man but women should have a right to force a men to become a biological father?

Women have the right to change their mind up to 20 weeks, men never once sperm is produce!

The level of myisandry on MN is truly shocking!

It’s entirely a private matter, as I fully believe it should be.

Women have been utilizing methods of abortion for as long as we have given birth, whether it’s been ’allowed’ or not. Approximately half of all abortions worldwide are done in countries where it is illegal.

I mean, the idea is if they don't consent they don't donate.

That being said, I'm not ok with sperm donation. It's not ok to donate your children.

That's disgusting. You can murder an actual 9 month old baby as long as not yet gone in to labour?

It's not about gender for me. Ideally, both would need to consent to terminate but it's too messy and should never have been allowed in the first place. Better to have changed attitudes to adopting.

I'll leave it there now. This is becoming depressing.

No, not at all. I truly think it should need both to consent but that is a lot of extra fertilised eggs and probably not enough surrogates available - when in the womb though, you do have the added issue / risk of what a human body goes through to grow that human before then birthing it, so you definitely cannot force anyone to go through that. And so then you have to override the man's wishes, sadly.

But I feel if the man wants the embryos to be implanted in someone (i.e. grow) then.. can't see why the woman should be allowed to say no if she changes her mind about having them implanted in her.

It's all just super messy and I would ban it completely though.

But that is not how the law works fortunately. A man can decide prior to implantation as he would if he was creating a child without IVF.

In my opinion - Of course.

Although if the egg is from the woman herself, who is to be the gestational parent herself, she can refuse consent for the embryo to be given to others.

That's not her giving her egg, that's her own egg being fertilised outside her body, which is different from donating eggs.

But donated eggs to a third party? Yes, withdrawal of consent after an embryo is created is unethical.

Once a man donates his sperm, it’s not his any more. He has voluntarily given it away/sold it, and should have no say in what happens next. If he is not happy with this, he should not donate. The same for egg donation.

No, you’re wrong. They can withdraw consent any time before implantation.

Did you read the article?

In the UK, a sperm or egg donor can withdraw consent up until the embryo is transferred into the womb…
The couple now want the law changed so that once an embryo has been created, consent cannot be withdrawn

Yes, I agree that donors should be able to withdraw the right to use their sperm up until the embrio is implanted.
It's not fair that they donate under the promise that they stay anonymous and then the rules changed allowing them to be traced. For that reason they should be allowed to opt out.

Also if the sperm has been used for multiple babies the donor should be able to say - halt, enough.

Is there a moral difference between, as you see it, a woman being forced to kill her potential children, and a man being forced to kill his potential children?

I'm actually in agreement with your own initial premise, but the BBC doesn't 'believe' one way or the other. That's not their job.