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

Well, yes. The reason the man taking the embryo and implanting it in another woman isn't equal is because the egg is the genetic material of the original woman.

What would be more similar was if a man wanted to stop an embryo created with his sperm and his partner's egg being used in a surrogate pregnancy when that wasn't his intention when he provided sperm for fertility treatment.

once it's been used it's too late, or it should be. do you think men who have unprotected sex have a right lt force and abortion cos they gave their sperm willingly l, fertilised and egg and changed their mind?
what if they change their mind after implantation? would you like a court mandated abortion for that too?

if his little fellas are sitting on ice, fine, bin them. once they're inside and egg they've been used and are no longer his.

So they should be able to consent once and then never allowed withdraw that consent for their sperm to be used again?

Is it though? The argument for outlawing abortion is life is created at conception. Is it less of a life if it is conceived outside a woman’s body?

If you think you’ll ever want to withdraw consent after an embryo is created then you don’t allow it to be created. After all, you can’t withdraw consent after implantation so there already is a point where you lose the right. Taking it one step back before people spend £££ on the process isn’t any different.

As long as donors know the rules when they donate, adding a step for further consent before creation of the embryo makes perfect sense to me.

As if the destruction of a fertilised egg in a test tube is an abortion. This is one of the most batshit things I’ve ever read on MN.

Yes but then those embryos can be there for ages between creation and transfer. There is a lot you might discover about yourself in that time and/or the other parents.

I think it's more analogous to say it's like someone agreeing to donate a kidney but then changing their mind before removal operation. In this case someone can donate sperm (or an egg) and create an embryo but withdraw consent before implantation.

Yeah, I don't agree with that at all. No one would be forcing me to kill my unborn child, regardless of where it was being incubated.

My question is this. With IVF there is a chance that it produces an excess of embryos (10 plus in one of the couples reported), what do you propose should happen to those embryos in order to avoid what you call ‘abortion’? FYI, clinics aren’t allowed to put more than 2 back in anyone round and are encouraged to make that one to avoid the risk of multiple births.

Abortion has always been about the location of the fertilised egg. Isn't that what "My body, my choice" requires? When there's an embryo in a woman's body it's absolutely her right to decide whether or not to continue with that pregnancy.

But that's not what's happening here. An embryo in a test tube does not constitute a pregnancy. That embryo is not in a woman's body, so the right for a woman to decide what happens with her body doesn't apply.

I don't understand your question, sorry. Terminating / aborting / throwing away - it's all the same. And this is the problem with artificial insemination - things get murkier if you can inseminate outside the womb.

I don't think abortion was ever about the location of the fertilised egg. The debate has always been about the development of the egg.. no one ever talked about the womb because it was a given.

I am pro choice, by the way. Just not pro men making that choice.

No, men shouldn't be allowed to withdraw consent. Makes no sense. Especially when you factor in the money spent and the combined DNA now with the eggs - how is the man allowed to force the woman to terminate her own fertilised eggs?

Let me know if I misunderstood anything. I only read it briefly.

I don't understand your question, sorry. Terminating / aborting / throwing away - it's all the same. And this is the problem with artificial insemination - things get murkier if you can inseminate outside the womb.

I don't think abortion was ever about the location of the fertilised egg. The debate has always been about the development of the egg.. no one ever talked about the womb because it was a given.

I am pro choice, by the way. Just not pro men making that choice.

No, men shouldn't be allowed to withdraw consent. Makes no sense. Especially when you factor in the money spent and the combined DNA now with the eggs - how is the man allowed to force the woman to terminate her own fertilised eggs?

Let me know if I misunderstood anything. I only read it briefly.

I just briefly read that link - it's a fertilised egg about to be terminated! Well, 5 of them... Wtaf?? So a bloke can force an abortion now?? In what bizarre, parallel universe am I living where someone voted yes to allowing men to force an abortion once an egg was fertilised?? Surely, the natural order should have been followed, and surely, once life is created in this specific manner, the default at the very least, should have been: if one party wants to proceed then it proceeds.

Where are the logical and reasonable people in this age?? Nowhere to be found.

At one time I did think differently but people can't have everything they want in life and just have to get on with it.

I think there's far too much self indulgence nowadays. Play the hand you're dealt with and get on with it. Everyone can't have a child and there should be far more acceptance of that than there is.

An abortion involves someone else’s body. A man cannot force a woman to abort a pregnancy she wants. Her body, her choice.

These embryos are not implanted in a woman’s body. If one party withdraws consent prior to implantation, then they must be destroyed.

nonsense. This is in no way, shape or form an ‘abortion’. IVF produces an excess of
embryos in many treatment cycles. Couples can choose to freeze or not. If they don’t freeze, that is not an abortion. If they do freeze, the can is kicked down the road and they need to decide later. Again, 10’ years, 20 its not an abortion. On of those couples in the article had 10 surplus embryos. Are you seriously suggesting that if they had a second cycle with max two embryos put on (as per guidelines) and that was successful, they need to carry on transferring all the remaining embryos?