Do you think a child needs to know how he/she was conceived?

[eleusis]

This sounds like a crazy level of nanny state to me. Why is is important to note if a baby is an IVF baby on a birth certificate? Weird. And scary.

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6924615.stm

[sazzybee]

I feel very strongly that children conceived using donor sperm or eggs should be told of their origins and I know that some children conceived this way are very angry about their parents keeping that fact from them. Having said that, having the details on the birth certificate is an appalling suggestion. It's up to my and my child (who was conceived using donor sperm) to decide when and if to tell people - it shouldn't be on such a public document.

expat - the law changed in 2005 - donors are contactable by their offspring when the child reaches the age of 18.

bandofmuggles - this is precisely why I think it's imperative that children are told how they were conceived. But it shouldn't be on a birth certificate.

Isn't it the law that you must tell your child if they are adopted? If so, can't they just implement something similar?

[wheelsonthebus]

what age shd a child know? it has been suggested a child might discover a birth certificate before it has been told the 'truth'. but shouldn't a child who can read have been told by then? or do people generally wait til they are a bit older?

[sazzybee]

I don't know if there's a right age, wheelsonthebus. I will be telling my DS from the moment he's old enough to be read story books to but then my situation is slightly different to many as I'm single. I guess some people may decide to wait until the child is a bit older if they're in a couple as it's a bit more complicated to explain.

[margoandjerry]

Sazzybee, am in the same situation as you.

I think if these MPs knew anything about donor conception they would know that the vast majority of children are told very early anyway. I went to the Donor Conception Network open day and there were hundreds of families there, all with kids who completely knew and accepted their history.

Not sure what problem this is trying to solve. Of course children have a right to know but not the woman in the post office. And actually for many children that right is not enforceable anyway - if they were born as a result of infidelity and the mother chooses never to tell, they will never know.

[margoandjerry]

oh and in answer to the question "how old" the answer is from day one of having any degree of comprehension.

Most of my contacts (though websites) in this situation say that children often first ask about their families as early as two or three - at which point you can give a very simple version of events. The children accept it completely at that age as they do not know it's unusual. At five or so they start themselves comparing to other families and you get further explaining to do then. Then the whole teenage identity issue hits.

It's basically a running theme throughout childhood and early adulthood.

I think you should treat it just the same as adoption - just as you might tell an adopted child really early that mummy and daddy chose them especially because they were so lovely.

[wheelsonthebus]

i would hv thought 2 or 3 is a little young. maybe i am wrong

[margoandjerry]

only this early because there is no daddy in our family so it is obvious even to a toddler earlier than it would be in a couple family

[berolina]

Goodness gracious, on birth certificates? What an odd and in fact slightly disturbing idea.

[sazzybee]

Oddly my 7YO nephew doesn't appear to be at all phased by the fact that he has a new cousin and that he doesn't have a daddy. He also has two uncles that live together so maybe he's just used to families not having to be the traditional nuclear structure.

[RosaLuxembourg]

What about those of us who are adopted? We have no choice about revealing our status to the world everytime someone needs to see our birth certificate. Do non-adopted people think they would be OK with that?
On the positive side, it does mean that people will have access to information about their genetic origin - again there will be some adoptees who disagree - but many of us find knowing something about our genetic origins immensely important, and that may well prove to be the same for people conceived through IVF - are they not entitled to that information?

[Kewcumber]

I believe strongly all children should know about their origins but that it should their choice who it is disclosed to.

FWIW I also beleive that about adoptions too - tis nobody's business but yours you should get a birth certificate with your paretns names on no reference to adoption.

They should keep a separate register of donor conception and adoptions with a copy sent to the individual.

And of course you can;t enforce a small percentage of them but teh vast number of donor conceptions are through licensed clinics and the donor conception network already keep a database IIRC so it doesn;t even need to be invented IYSWIM.

[Kewcumber]

very few babies conceived though IVF are not the genetic product of their parents. It is not an IVF issue but a donor egg/sperm issue (obviously all donor eggs are IVF but fewer donor sperm babies are IVF)

[chopchopbusybusy]

Like many of these stories it is quite ill thought out because I can see no way that it could be enforced BUT I'm going to go against the popular opinion here and say that I do think it is a good idea to be recorded on the birth certificate if donor eggs or sperm is used. I think that some parents might choose not to tell a child that they were conceived in this way and I believe the child does have a right to know.
Regarding the privacy issue then that could be overcome by only requiring the information to be on the full certificate and not on the shortened version, which, as far as I know is acceptable for passports, starting school etc.

I don't really know what age I would think it appropriate to explain to children as their grasp of how babies are made is I think quite shaky until about 12ish. Explaining adoption is easier because you can say that they were chosen.

[Kewcumber]

putting it on long form not short form is actually a good idea.

But disagree with age - don't think donor conception is any more difficult to understand than adoption children should know very young - before they can understand it. Surprisingly children don't really understand the concept of adoption properly until they are around 6.

[Pruners]

Message withdrawn

[chopchopbusybusy]

Kewcumber, I don't really know what age I think it would be appropriate to explain about donor conception but I do have 2 DDs of 13 and 10 and I know exactly what stage of understanding they are at about making babies

[feelingfedup]

given the decreasing availability of donor eggs and sperm in the UK a growing number go abroad for these products. Their donor conceived babies won't be identified on birth certificates, so anyone who wants choice about how and when or if they tell will just get sperm/eggs from abroad.

[MsHighwater]

I'm the mum of a 2 year old girl conceived using donor sperm and IVF. I agree 100% that my daughter has a right to know that she was conceived this way but am appalled at the suggestion that the information should be compulsorily recorded on birth certificates.

Why is it that our government (and many of its supporters) seem to think that if it is right to behave in a certain way, it is also right to make it unlawful to behave any other way?

[madamez]

MsHighwater: I agree with you, we currently have a Government addicted to the most appalling amount of meddling in people's lives, with the result of a creeping change in attitudes to privacy and freedom: now almost everything has to be enforced by stupid, unworkable and badly formulated laws.

[SenoraPostrophe]

but it's not about the actual method though is it?

It's about children who were made from donated sperm or eggs knwoing as much. and I think they should know. why shouldn't they?