Those opposed to surrogacy, what are your views on egg donation?

[wholeeverything]

I'm a gender critical woman with a high degree of skepticism about commercial surrogacy. I'm also facing the possibility of never having my own child.

Thinking hard about egg donation, I am conflicted about my own views about the ethics of it, from the point of view of the egg donor. What are your views? I am particularly interested in the views of those opposed to surrogacy. Do you see it as the same issue?

I feel like I cannot think objectively because of my own fertility issues. I am personally fine with the ethics of the child's rights, in that I would view it as similar to adoption with a child having the right to know their biological origins, and that then being something for me to decide if I am OK with at a personal level. Where there is full transparency, I don't see it as violating the child's rights.

But what about the young women selling eggs? Is it invasive, dangerous? Should it be viewed like surrogacy or selling an organ? Is it only considered by women in financial hardship, i.e. effectively coerced?

However, she was, in fact, donor conceived, to a woman too old to conceive with her own eggs

Eggs can’t be genetically tested. The woman who shared her eggs can be screened in the usual way (questionnaires & blood tests).

Embryos can & they look for major chromosomal defects and more rarely specific genes eg. screening embryos for cystic fibrosis if parents are known carriers, which leaves a huge variety of inherited & spontaneous abnormalities that are unaccounted for.

You also seem to be ultra focussed on eggs and not the fact that the child has received 50% of their genes from the father.

Certainly, it would never have happened if egg donation wasn’t available.**

No one can be guaranteed a healthy child. We don’t dissuade individuals with strongly inheritable mental health issues and other highly heritable diseases from procreating so I’m not sure what your point is.

The fact that IVF is available is also one of the few ways with parents who are known generic carriers of certain illnesses can avoid passing their genes on.

Id just love to know if @VarioPerfect would say to the mother of a disabled child who was conceived any other way that "certainly it would have been better if you were just unable to have this child in the first place" because that's just wild.

It's very rare for someone to just openly say that it would be better if disabled children were unable to be born and for others to either let it slide or loudly agree. Unless you're collectively condemning the parents method of conception on a feminist board then it's fine apparently.

Of course not, and that’s not what I’ve said. If you’re determined to twist my words and/or miss the point, there’s no point continuing. This woman was sold a lie by a clinic that preys on vulnerable women. That’s what I’m condemning.

As previously stated she wouldn't have been sold a lie, the literature and consent forms are very robust. And it is made perfectly clear that healthy embryo does not equal healthy baby. You don't want to accept that though.

No, she fundamentally misunderstood what they told her.

We had PGT-A testing as well as NIPT testing and it was very clear to me the only thing they were looking for was the right number of cells in the right places and in particular trisomies 13,18 and 21.

PGT-P is illegal in the UK, and indeed it is also illegal to test embryos for conditions such as cystic fibrosis unless there is a credible reason to believe the condition can be passed.

Her child’s genetic defect also occurred spontaneous post conception - there is no in vitro genetic testing that would have spotted the issue. If anything she should be more concerned about the pregnancy sonographers who failed to notice her child’s anatomical abnormalities.

IVF clinics aren’t beacons of selfless care (trust me - we know) but she or the journo has fundamentally chosen to misunderstand the situation.

are they though?

I certainly have been shoved a paper quickly to sign to give 'consent' before an operation. when I wasn't in the state to read or take fully in what was explained to me.

Any thoughts on how shocked some of us were by your comments about adopted children @SerenaCat93? It would be refreshing for someone to reflect on what they said and see how offensive / upsetting it could be to others.

Yes I apologise my comments were offensive to adopters. I was trying to explain the difference between adoption and donor conception to someone who clearly didn't understand the difference with the knowledge I have of adoption which is that adoption occurs when an unwanted pregnancy occurs and parents choose to give up the child for adoption rather than have an abortion which has been the case for the two adoptees I know. They have struggled their whole lives knowing they were unwanted by their birth parents. I of course would not say these things to somebody who has been adopted, I wouldn't pass judgement on an adoptee at all, I am simply stating what I have been told by the adoptee's I know who are now adults the same age as me.

To now know that most adoptions aren't because the child was unwanted but that they were forcibly taken from people who did want them is even more sad than being unwanted in the first place in my opinion, especially if the child wanted to stay with their parents too but their parents were deemed unfit. That's a double tragedy with hearts broken on both sides. It was my understanding when the parents didn't want to give their children up they could not be adopted and we're placed in foster care with the aim of reunification.

I certainly don't think adoption is the solution to infertility as people often believe because they are different problems. An adopted child doesn't replace the child you can't have, they are person in their own right who already had parents/a family and has been taken from them/given away with their own lived history already which is not your families history. I know this causes profound difficulties for both the children and parents from the adoptee's I know. It's sad all round and to deny that these problems exist and gloss over them as if adoption is only a positive thing is not correct in my opinion.

Several posters have been very insensitive about my daughter and our relationship and quite rude in my opinion so I was not particularly sensitive in my replies. Not my finest moment but no one has yet apologised for their description of my child or family or their insulting description of my "delusions and fantasies" about actually being my child's mother so you'll understand why I've not been quick to grovel for forgiveness myself.

Am I allowed to question why some posters think it would have been better that the woman in the article not be allowed to have children at all because her daughter was born disabled now? While I agree it would be refreshing to see someone here apologise for causing offence, no else has yet done so, any judgement for them?

@SerenaCat93 I'm sorry but carrying a doner egg child makes you the birth mother but not the biological mother. I can understand why that distinction may upset you but its a fact that you really should acknowledge even if only to yourself and child

Whatever your views on the ethics of egg donation, reducing motherhood to genetics and telling a woman who gestated and gave birth to her child that she isn’t a “biological mother” is extraordinarily reductive. Pregnancy is quite literally a biological relationship and process. We can acknowledge the importance of a child’s genetic origins without reducing the woman who carried them to an incubator.

Its not a biological relationship though as their is no genetic relationship.
Treating the birth mother as a gestational carrier would be Treating her as an incubator calling her the birth mother does not. However she id not the biological mother as she has no biological relationship with the child, its a matter of fact not feelings or wants a child created from a doner egg is simply not related to the birth mother

Genetics is not a synonym for biology.

Gestation is a literal biological relationship. Pregnancy is a biological process and she does have a lifelong biological relationship with this child (as would a surrogate) through the two way cellular exchange of pregnancy.

You have your own opinion but the facts are a simple DNA test will show that she is not the biological mother because she isn't end of

Louder for the back: genetics is not a synonym for biology. Genetics is a specific sub branch of biology. Taking a dump is also a biological process, as is a heart beating, as is dying.

When talking about biological parents we are talking about genetics and nothing else you can pretend otherwise all you like but facts are facts and shes not the biological mother she is the birth mother and they are two different things as much as you would like to pretend otherwise

I have done egg freezing for me and since had a child. If I choose not to use my frozen eggs I might donate them to a mum to be or to science.

No, your basic understanding of the difference between genetics and biology is fundamentally incorrect.

I am not her genetic mother no but we do have a biological connection because I carried her. When a woman carries a baby the baby's DNA is found in the mother's blood stream for the rest of her life. Even though my daughter is not genetically related to me if you took a DNA test of her and 3 other children, and a blood test from me, you would know that she is the one I carried and not the other three. There is a permanent biological link even though it's not genetic. She also got her microbiome from me and her immune system. If you cultured the gut microbiome of me, my daughter and three other children, you would know she was mine.

I'm a microbiologist, the biological connections between mothers and their children are fascinating. So I know I'm not her genetic mother but I also know we are biologically linked in many ways. She's not just some random kid that grew in my belly and she's certainly not the equivalent of an adopted child as some other posters claimed just because she doesn't have my genes.

In both medical and scientific definition I am her biological mother. In biology/medicine when an egg donor is used the mothers are described as follows:
Genetic Mother: The egg donor contributes 50% of the child’s DNA.
Gestational/Biological Mother: The woman who carries and gives birth to the child builds the baby's tissues, organs, and blood supply through her own body during pregnancy.

If you don't like those terms or agree with them, fine. But they are the scientific/medical terms and as a scientist who understands how deeply biologically linked a mother is to a child she carries regardless of DNA it really doesn't bother me if people agree with the terms or not. Some people don't agree that the earth is round, doesn't mean they're right. Just means they don't understand science.

As I biologist, I laughed at this for several minutes 😂

Isn't this a bit of a circular argument though? If you're so biologically entwined with the egg/child you carried and birthed then surely you agree it is no small matter if a woman did that and then that child was given away to another family? But you also seem to be saying biology doesn't matter as it's who brings you up that matters, not the biology? So does it matter not? You seem to be arguing both sides here.

I do think it's a massive thing for a child to be born to a woman and then given away to another family. Why do you think I don't?

No thoughts on the posters calling me delusional and saying my child was bought and made to order and refusing to apologise after being called out by several other posters then despite getting the apology you wanted out of me. Lovely, yet entirely predictable 😊

True, adoption is not the answer to infertility. It is more that you get to a position in life where you decide you want to make a difference by choosing to parent a child who would otherwise stay in the care system. That might be because if infertility, maybe not. Plentybof older, single people adopt for example.

Itbis inherently altruistic. It is also really hard. But imo it is the ethical choice.

I think egg donation is almost certainly unethical unless the woman has already completed her family and has no financial incentive to donate the remaining frozen eggs (wouldn't happen with IVF but could if a younger woman froze her eggs "just in case"). Although I don't think the promotion of egg freezing for the future is ethical either.
Aside from this issue though I find it insane that people are saying the woman who grows a baby in her womb, from her blood, and gives birth to it is not the biological mother. The baby has a separate genetic mother, but the biological relationship of pregnancy and birth remains. This is one reason (of many) that surrogacy is so wrong. It severs the relationship with the biological mother.
You can't give birth to someone else's baby.

I agree adoption is completely altruistic, it's about helping a child in need, it is not simply an alternative method of building a family when you cannot create your own as many people who have never experienced infertility think it is. It is extremely frustrating and insulting to be repeatedly told to "just adopt instead" by people who have easily had their own children. They of course didn't choose to adopt instead of procreate, because deep down they know it's not the same thing.

I also think posters claiming donor conceived children are the same as adopted children are completely overlooking the challenges of adoption and minimising the trauma the children face. Being removed from your birth family must be a horrific experience, being voluntarily given away, which does happen in some adoption cases must be soul destroying, I know it destroyed my friends self esteem. Their life experiences are so much bigger than simply not being genetically related to their adoptive parents.

I think adoptive parents are very special people, it's a difficult road and one I wouldn't choose. I've seen the difficulties that come with adoption both for the children and the adoptive parents and it's not something someone who already has a broken heart from infertility can handle well in my opinion.

My dad has started talking about adoption/fostering now we've all grown up and flown the nest because he wants to help children who need a loving home. That's what it should be about, not an attempt to fill the child sized hole in your heart, that is bound to end in disaster and too much to ask of a child that has already suffered the loss of their birth family.