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

I'm not sure how I feel about it - I don't currently have strong views either way.

On the one hand, they have already donated the eggs/sperm. If it were a kidney instead, would they be asking for it back? (Which is a shit analogy in a way, because a donated kidney can only be used once).

On the other hand, people's views about things DO change over time. So you may have donated sperm or eggs and then experience a total change of heart and not want multiples of your offspring running around.

I think it’s fine for a donor to change their mind and withdraw consent. Is it hard/devastating for the party that wants the embryos implanted? Of course. Does that mean that it shouldn’t happen? Absolutely not.

I’m reminded of what Sophia Vergara was put through by her ex. They created embryos but the relationship broke down and she obviously no longer wanted a child with him. He repeatedly dragged her to court to try and use them against her will. Fortunately he failed.

This isn’t akin to a man trying to force an abortion because he doesn’t want a child because bodily autonomy doesn’t come into play.

They signed a contract that stated this could happen. They were responsible for reading that contract thoroughly. That they didn’t is their responsibility.

I think donating sperm is the consent.

But also I don’t agree with anonymous sperm or egg donation. I think having a biological child walking around somewhere and not even caring or knowing about them is just horribly irresponsible.

Yes, I can't have children at all and fertility clinics refused IVF treatment as even if I managed to get pregnant, in all likeihood neither I nor any baby would survive.

Not everyone can have children. It's sucks but that's the hand some people are dealt.

People need to start accepting it rather than babies becoming a commodity.

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.

Bearing in mind men walk away from their real children quite frequently, its not that surprising. Most dad / mum donations are only a cluster of cells not an actual person, that person is part of the parents not the donor.

It's the same law when couples are using their own eggs and sperm. Both have to consent for the embryos or frozen embryos to be used. There have been cases where one half of a former couple wants to use frozen embryos and the other party refuses consent, so they cannot be used.
I don't think you can reasonably have a different law when the providers of the egg and sperm aren't known to each other.

But they do consent. They consent to having their sperm used for impregnating. Since they have already consented then what would be the point of them having to consent again at embryo stage?

Absolutely. It is too late to change your mind once embryos exist
So you agree that the woman shouldn't be allowed to destroy it without his consent too and that he is entitled to do what he wants with the embryo even if she wants it destroyed.

The wishes and even desperation of a woman to have a baby doesn't trump morality.

How else do they think their swimmers are going to be used? Spray for the pay and sashay away.

Sorry to hear that. You being refused fertility treatment is really sad and maybe your thoughts would be different if your circumstances were different.

It wouldn’t be feasible in the vast majority to only allow one go at an embryo transfer per egg collection cycle. The embryos have to be frozen if not used in the same monthly cycle, and even if you do transfer one embryo fresh the remainder are frozen. Egg harvesting can be brutal (been there, done that) and risky.

In most cases more than one embryo is created per harvesting cycle, and given the stats of a successful pregnancy from each embryo transfer varies from 1% to max 50% it simply wouldn’t be safe to do an entire egg harvesting cycle for every single embryo transfer attempt,

They can withdraw consent, the sperm is then destroyed.......

I feel for the couples, it's an absolutely awful scenario to be in and not one that you'd expect to happen. Before you have IVF you have to fill out a lot of documents and consent forms. I have frozen embryos and I would be devastated if I was told they couldn't be used and had to be destroyed. Egg retrieval was really rough for me and I'm older so even if you take the financial aspect away I wouldn't go through it again as I would be unlikely to have the same success now. I understand you have to respect the donor's bodily autonomy and consent but it's really harsh to destroy much wanted embryos, particularly in the case where the donor wouldn't be the legal parent.

But he isn't 'providing' it on subsequent occasions. Like when he ejaculates inside a woman's body, he has provided one lot of sperm.

He has consented to its use in combination with eggs (either another donation or the mother's own) to create embryos. Whether those embryos go on to become fetuses and eventually babies or are discarded is nothing to do with him.

Before they are used to make embryos he has every right to withdraw consent. Once that new combination has been created, it shouldn't be his choice alone.

Reproductive rights will always be skewed because reproduction impacts one sex so much more than the other.

He can withdraw consent before they are implanted, regardless of whether they have been used to make embryos.

Reproductive rights are skewed only when another person’s body becomes involved. Prior to implantation this is not the case. Both parties need to be in agreement for any transfer to go ahead.

When I started fertility treatment aged 27 our closest clinic had a scheme that was heavily promoted whereby younger women donated their eggs to an older woman/couple in return for them covering the majority of the costs of both couples' treatment costs. I think in hindsight it was exploitative both ways. Someone desperate to get a helping hand with the costs of IVF might make rash decisions.

I can see how your thoughts on someone else having your genetic child might well change with time. You might feel differently if you are lucky enough to have your own children when you fully realise the enormity of what you have given away. Or if you are not lucky enough to have your own children the thought of your child being out there with a different family could well torture you.

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?

Fair enough. You seem like a really strong person ❤️

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.

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.

Well, this takes us down the route of is IVF right at all/ should NHS pay etc. that’s another can of worms but I will say what I always say; there are a myriad of conditions that fall under having what you want/playing the hand you are dealt. Breast reconstruction after mastectomy, sperm freezing for young cancer patients, investigations into miscarriage…. it’s endless, you can debate each one. People
tall about medical necessity but it’s not black and white.