Sperm donor children win right to trace their fathers

[melsy]

What are your thoughts on this .

I feel for the children that may trace their natural birth fathers, but how will it impact them if they are rejected by someone who doesnt want to be known. Or should you then not donate. It will now make a mans decision to donate that much harder. Why do families then have to suffer the consequences of loosing a child they may have waited a long time for.
I am interested in other views on this.

No, it won't be retrospective - thought this is a voluntary register. In future sperm donors will be told clearly (just like parents giving up children for adoption) that at the age of 18 any children born of their donation will be given details of who they are. In other countries this has not led to a drop in donations, and personally, I think that even if it does, then it has to be worth it for the sake of the children. I'm sure nobody thinks it is a good idea to lie to adopted children about their origins (which used to be commonplace) so why should it be different for children born of voluntary sperm donation by donors who will always know that one day they may be contacted?

I think that 'giving up' sperm is VERY different to giving a up a real child, I doubt that a lot of the men would think about the emotional attachment / paternal bond side of things as parents in an adoption situation would.

I think it is unfair to apply the same rules to a man donating sperm as are applied to parents and adoption. Ok the outcome (child) is essentially the same, but for me the situations are very differnt and should be handled accordingly.

For me the man donating sperm is a donor, the man giving up a live child is a father.

Aloha, it isn't that straight forward in Sweden either. Many people in Sweden is not happy about this law at all. Many parents, for example, don't really want to know who the donor is. He never had a relationship with the mother and they might not feel the need to establish one later either. IMO this is not the father of the child. It's just a man who wanked into a cup 18 years ago to enable other couples to fulfill their dream of a child.

message withdrawn

No, it won't be retrospective - thought this is a voluntary register. In future sperm donors will be told clearly (just like parents giving up children for adoption) that at the age of 18 any children born of their donation will be given details of who they are. In other countries this has not led to a drop in donations, and personally, I think that even if it does, then it has to be worth it for the sake of the children. I'm sure nobody thinks it is a good idea to lie to adopted children about their origins (which used to be commonplace) so why should it be different for children born of voluntary sperm donation by donors who will always know that one day they may be contacted?

Aloha, it isn't that straight forward in Sweden either. Many people in Sweden is not happy about this law at all. Many parents, for example, don't really want to know who the donor is. He never had a relationship with the mother and they might not feel the need to establish one later either. IMO this is not the father of the child. It's just a man who wanked into a cup 18 years ago to enable other couples to fulfill their dream of a child.

I think I am going mad. I am repeating myself and posting all over the place!
What I wanted to say was that I think sperm donation is very different from adoption. It is nothing emotional in it. Adoption raises totally different questions IMO.

I suppose I think I care most about the children - I just think it is the same as adoption. I don't think children should be kept in the dark about their parentage. You could say that a woman who had a one night stand and then gave her child up for adoption isn't a mother, but I don't think that should prevent the adult child of that woman having the right to know his/her origins. I cannot really see the difference between the two. Children do suffer from not knowing. Not all children, but quite a lot. Only 20% of adopted children choose NOT not to try and trace their biological family so it is clear that the desire to know and make contact is pretty fierce. I think children have a right to know and I don't think parents have a right to prevent them knowing.

My point exactly fairymum.

P.S. I think its MN thats gone a bit loopy re posting, not you

I can totally see why parents wouldn't want their child to know. But it used to be the case that parents didn't want their children to know they were adopted - the arguments against lifting the anonymity of parents who gave up children for adoption were just the same really, and I think in the future anonymity of sperm donors will be regarded in the same way.

WSM, but isn't that distinction really not yours to make, but for the child born of that father to make?

As I said, I used to think anonymity was best, but I have heard of and read stuff by children born of anonymous sperm donors and it has truly blighted their lives. I think their rights must be paramount, over and above those of the parents who have what they want, a child. The donors will be aware of what might happen, and at least they intend to make a child and are aware of it so it shouldn't be total surprise to be contacted. If they are fiercely opposed to being contacted, then they won't donate sperm.

I completely agree with this change in the law. My biological mother died when I was 2 and my father lost all contact with that side of the family. Despite having a stepmother from the age of 4, who I saw, and still see, as my real mother, you cannot imagine the overwhelming need that I felt to know about my genetic history. Those of you who have always known that you had your fathers nose and your mothers eyes cannot understand how difficult it is to not know where parts of you come from. It struck me particularly when I was pregnant myself - when you are about to pass your own genes on it becomes so important to know where they came from.
Whether a child is the product of a donation or an adoption doesn't make any difference, they should still have the chance to know about somebody who does have such a huge influence on their genetic make up.

I have to say that I see no comparison with donor sperm and adoption at all. TBH, I don't think donating sperm is any different to donating blood (or any other substance). If I donate blood I have no further responsibility to the reciever and it is anonymous. It may even save someone's life - but my part ends there and then once he needle is removed. I think it is the same IMO.

I do get your point that some children might want to know who donated the sperm,but I think there are other ways of handling such an "identity crisis". I definatly think they have the right to know the way they were conceived, but just not who the father is.
Adoption is totally different. A child who was adopted might want to know why they were conceived and why they were given up for adoption. It raises the "did my parents not love me"-question. Sperm donation is rather clinical and there is no need to find out why sperm was donated. A sperm donor does not want/need any kind of relationship with the "child". That's not why they donate sperm. The result of an 18 year-old meeting a sperm donor might not be very nice. The 18 year-old in the midst of an identity crisis might expect a response they would not get from donor. The sperm donor would be very unlikely to have any feelings of pride or affection for the child. All he wanted to do was to give another couple a child.
I have also considered donating my eggs if I choose not to have any more children. I know there is a great need for egg donors.Like others have said on this thread, I would never do it if I risked getting an 18 year-old knocking on my door in the future. It would also be weird for my children. If I donate my eggs I do it to help a couple conceive a child. I do not think of this as my child AT ALL. I do not wish to have any contact with the child, the child's family or that my family have to deal with this later.

This might be a bit controversial, but is it really so important to find out where your nose came from ? s it not possible that there are actually other problems/issues in your life and you think it is caused by you not knowing who donated their sperm to make you?

I think prufrock's nose analogy applies more to her sort of situation, and adopted children, than to this. I tend to agree that the situation of an AID (?) child is different - as someone has already said, what is handed over here is not a child, and there is no question of "why did they have me and then leave me?"

Presumably there would be some kind of neutral agency to handle enquiries and everybody would have a code - essential information would be freely available but everything else would be subject to mutual consent.

Well, I suppose we DO think genetics are important otherwise we'd all adopt our children instead of going to great lengths (often) to conceive our 'own'. Even parents of donor insemination children must think genetics are important as they choose to have children with one genetic parent instead of adopting.
I think it is a little unfair to say that children who want to know who their biological father is must have something a bit wrong with them. You wouldn't say that about someone who was adopted wanting to find their biological father, would you? And his sperm 'donation' could well have been a lot less thoughtful than that of an informed sperm donor. And people change. One woman who was born by sperm donorship and was seeking her bio father had a man visit her who donated sperm at the same clinic many years ago who now very much wanted to meet his offspring and hoped she would be his daughter. It can happen. As for 'is it important?', well it seems to me that if it is important to the children, now grown, then yes, it is important. Of course it's not important to us, but then we, at least most of us, know who are parents are and where we come from. I think the children are the ones to decide if it is important. If upbringing was all that mattered, then why do 80% of adopted children try to find their bio parents? They can't all be unhappy or screwy! I read a feature that I thought was excellent on this subject without being a polemic - my attempts at links have failed but it is:
observer.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0.6903,636020,00.html

message withdrawn

I also think the basic ethical issue here is that people should have the right to know who they are, where they come from and who their parents are. That's it for me. I don't think healthy families are best built on lies and evasions. Children will never be forced to know or contact their bio-father, but I think they should have the option.

Twiglett, I totally agree.

I really do think that this will have an impact of people donating, and I think it will reduce the number of donora. I was speaking of this topic with friends at the weekend (as you do!). All of the blokes thee said that this would put them off doing it. You see, most of the guys I know are decent blokes and if, 18 years down the line, someone knocked on the door and said they were his child they would feel that they had to do something about it, even if they didn't want to. I think most decent people would. That is why I feel it will put people off.

With regards the genetics - why can't all the important stuff about medical histories, and appearance info be put on a form to be passed on to the child at 18. Then they would know a certain amount of information but the donor keeps his/her right to be anonymous too.

I know my father true, but my little cousin doesn't - father apparantly unknown. So I do understand to an extent but I think that the issue of sperm donation is so different. They was no relationship between man and woman at all. It was a clinical/medical procedure to create a child for an infertile couple. This new law may actually affect how many such couples can have this miracle happen for them. What happens to their rights?