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

One person's "platformed" is another person's "reported on a matter which is currently a matter of interest and debate for the general public".

The BBC report is entirely factual. They do not suggest or give any opinion. It is only the words of the people interviewed that suggest any opinion or emotion regarding the matter.

But that's not true now. They have right to say "no more children from my donation". That's what the article is about.

--
The long-tern frozen embrios and embryo adoption makes it even more murky.
I'd really like the law to protect a woman already going through the IVF process from the impact of the recent change of mind on the donor's side, but the embrios lasting decades and being passed down are not the same thing.

yes, you have almost understood the legality of the process but not fully. Donors consent at donation (clue is in the name!) once donated, they have no rights the donation. Many people are finding it difficult to understand here

That would depend on where you are in the world. There are no gestational limits on abortion where I live.

I see nothing immoral about withdrawing consent. Prior to implantation a woman’s desire to proceed does not and should not override the right of a man to say no.

So yeah, let a man kill your child. As per these women and what they're going through now. Got you.

How else can you do it? Precisely how it’s done now, with implantation requiring the consent of both donors.

Up until the point when an embryo is implanted, either party should retain the right to withdraw their consent.

Well, it's her DNA.. but I disagree about abortion only ever being about a woman's body.

You'd think it would be, wouldn't you??

But no, the people trying to control us constantly argue that it's about at what point the feotus becomes conscious / a baby.

Hence why we cannot abort after 6 months (is it?) - you definitely cannot abort at 8.5 months. Still your body though, isn't it.

Anyway, I don't care about where the fertilised egg is being incubated. Don't try to force women to kill their (potential) children against their will. That's plainly immoral. Obviously. My god.

Did you miss where I said I am pro choice.. but yeah, that's interesting because it means it cannot need both parties to consent to the destruction / termination.

Hmmmm so murky with artificial means of creating humans. I just don't agree with IVF full stop anyway. Maybe ignore that it's outside the womb and just let the woman decide once fertilised what she wants to do as per any normal 'pregnancy'. How else can you do it? Can't be letting some random bloke dictate you have to kill your child.

I suppose this is why embryo adoption is now a thing. I couldn't do that either, as still my babies.

I didn't need fertility treatments but I did see my babies as babies as soon as the test was positive. I consider that when the sperm and egg combine and start dividing, it's a unique individual already. The DNA has been laid down, the characteristics are there. To me, it's my child, just at a very early stage of development. Obviously that will shape any choices I make about pregnancies and any embryos created by IVF.

I'm sure I'm in the minority, but it's how I feel, so it's what I apply in practice in my own life. I'm not comfortable with the idea of fetal reduction, so wouldn't implant more than three embryos at a time, in case they all 'take'. Or two, if triplets is still too high a risk (haven't researched it).

I've also found myself in a position where pregnancies are no longer safe for me, so if I had remaining embryos, I'm not sure how I'd resolve that. Fortunately I don't have to.

That's an interesting idea. I personally don't believe they are lives at that stage, but I still think I would have some difficulty just saying 'yep, we're done, get rid!' and I can't quite articulate why. The difficulty is, they might not all be very viable embryos either, some may have a very low chance of becoming a viable pregnancy.

This is such an interesting discussion.

For what it's worth I really think people of either sex need the option to withdraw consent after donation. I seriously considered it when younger, and the idea fills me with horror now, so perhaps some sort of timescale could be implemented, and if people gave initial consent, then we're contacted for continued consent after 5 years, then another 5 years etc, and during that time period once continued consent was obtained a donor could only remove consent for specific set reasons. If you also added renewed consent at the time of embryo creation that would also give some added reassurance as I assume most people who freeze embryos for a second child would be likely to use it within 5 years? But that would be an administration nightmare.

I do think there are continued difficulties with using donor sperm or eggs though, and so perhaps it does need to be followed up more carefully for everyone's sake....

I've always said that if I had to do the frozen embryo thing, I'd keep going until I'd used them all. I know many will disagree but I've always seen my children as babies the moment the egg is fertilised. So for me personally, I would feel I had to give them all a chance. For someone with my outlook, limiting the number of embryos created would probably be sensible.

What would you do then if you had 10 frozen embryos (which is perfectly possible)? Have 10 pregnancies? (Or attempted pregnancies) Or would you at some point have to decide to let the embryos be destroyed? It would almost definitely be the latter, and if you believe it's a baby or a life at that stage, that's a very slippery slope...

Yes, of course. But I think a closer analogy would be someone agreeing to donate a kidney, having the removal operation, then changing their mind before the kidney is transplanted into the recipient and insisting the donated kidney is thrown away.

Anyway, I think that some of the scenarios involving stored embryos are heart-breaking for the would-be parents concerned, so we ought to try to minimise the chances of this happening.

I had a child using donor sperm and found it frustrating that the HFEA (or perhaps the sperm bank), insisted on a one-size-fits-all approach. My donor wrote in his profile than he was happy to be contacted by would-be recipients if they had any questions. I would have liked to take him up on this offer as I had a specific health question. But the sperm bank said "no". They wouldn't even pass on a single message and response.

If contracts were allowed to be more bespoke (I don't know if this would require a change in the law), recipients might be able to choose a donor who had waived his right to withdraw consent after donation, or who only retained it in certain, specified scenarios, such as the discovery that he was a carrier of a serious genetic condition. And all parties would really have to think through all the possible scenarios, rather than signing a contract they don't like and crossing their fingers.

also agree. once that embryo is created, it's now their fetus not your egg or sperm.

there's a difference between making a donation as in giving it away, and making something together. by rights, once your pot is in the freezer, once you've given it away, it isn't yours.

Exactly, it’s not open ended. The donor knows how much they are donating. I think they should be allowed to withdraw consent until matching and they should be alerted at matching and offered an out at that point. It seems very unfair considering the money involved.

Yes of course.

Obviously once embryo created he shouldnt be able to withdraw consent.

The only exception i could see to that should be
if he finds he has a heritable disease.

Also it occurs to me that as the consent is done and not redo each time and sperm (or egg) frozen the bio dad could be dead before the embryo is even made.
so you could have a 60/70 etc year younger half sibling.

its not re compensation but that
1 the mum maybe too old to collect more eggs
2 ivf is so expensive why should they have to do again at 5k +
3 its not great for the woman’s body
4 added stress that consent on frozen could be withdrawn at any point
5 for most couple who would be doing donor ivf they are likely to be over 35, many wouldnt have time to try again