Me? Opinionated? Really?
Okay – yes really. I am. Lately many people, given the nature of my conception with Will, have asked what my opinion is on the B.C. Supreme Court case happening now. In this case, a child of a sperm donor is seeking to have the laws amended so that records of donors are kept and given to the child on request at age eighteen. In this woman’s case, her donors records were legally destroyed but she wants to make sure that no one else has to go through what she has. It should be noted that her parents were aware of this law when they decided to use a donor to conceive.
So. What do you think? Fair or not fair?
My call? Unfair to the donor. Sorry. I don’t think the law should be changed.
Is this easy for me to say because Will’s donor is an open donor – meaning when Will is eighteen, he can get contact information for him? Maybe. Is this easy for me to say because I already have an immense amount of family medical history and a ton of personal history about his donor? Sure. I’ll give you that.
But I still feel the rights of these anonymous donors will be violated if they change this law. I understand that open donors were not allowed at the time of this woman’s conception so yes, maybe some of these donors would like to know about any offspring. But what if they don’t? And what about the men who now specifically donate anonymously and are CHOSEN by the mother or parents. I’m sorry but their privacy should and needs to be protected.
I feel very blessed. I had an incredible counsellor who talked to me about the pros and cons of open versus anonymous donors. Her point was this – why create a potential additional issue with your kid. Maybe Will will have zero interest in meeting his ‘father’ because hopefully he has a kickass dad by then or maybe I’ll be enough for him. BUT if he does have an interest, by choosing an open donor, I don’t have to worry about that. The ball is totally in Will’s court. MAN I hope he wants to meet him because I really, really want to thank him for the incredible gift that he’s given me.
Do I feel for this woman and the other children of donors that I’ve seen speak or read about who feel a missing piece of their lives because they don’t have information about their donors? Absolutely I do. But – without these men, they wouldn’t be here. And I feel the need to maintain their privacy outweighs the rights of these kids.
I’d be really curious to hear what you guys think about this. Care to share?
I have heard the young woman in the BC case speak, and when I did, she totally won me over to her side of the argument. On the other hand, you make a compelling argument, too. It’s a really tough one!
In the end, probably the best thing to do is to require all donors to be open, like Wills’ dad. As you say, he may have zero interest, but then again, he might want to find out, and I think he should be able to if he wants to.
The other question, then, is what happens if the dads want to come looking for the kids at some point down the road? Lots of women have had babies through donation and raised children all on their own, and they may not welcome suddenly having a new parent in the picture!
ERin – I love the whole ‘biodad’ thing…I’m TOTALLY using that lingo from now on – it’s perfect!
WTF, I commented yesterday and it’s gone! I think there is a comment goblin after me lately, I’ll have to contact Ali or Carol!
Anyhoo, I totally agree with you Sara, if the donor wants to stay anonymous, they should be able to. I do feel for the girl in BC though.
I like what Dave has to say about how no one gets to choose what situation they get born into. And, I’m not saying that those of us who use fertility treatment want their kids more, but there is something about it….we worked hard for that and agonized over decisions and wait times, etc. It’s not easy, and we are both lucky we were successful. I guess I can’t explain it but what it ultimately comes down to is being loved. Will is loved. He may want to find his biodad some day, but the love will always be there shoring him up.
I hope that the girl in BC has that love also, to help her through this.
I agree with you Sara… Ultimately, the donor DONATED, and did so under the presumption that such a donation would be anonymous. Because (although I am sure that the donors enjoy knowing that they are helping people) I assume that the leading factor is the financial compensation…? And as such, it is not as though the donors are just egomaniacs looking to take over the genetic world, one baby at a time (or maybe this is a common outlook by donors. i dont know.)… So, assuming that there will always be at least ONE donor that is NOT happy about the thought of a brood of children knocking on their door in 18 years, the rights must be protected. Past, present, future. Irregardless of legal action demanding otherwise.
It is unfortunate that the spermkids with a willing ‘meet and greet’ donor have to suffer, but isnt it always the case in life that it only takes one to shut down the party…? (not to say that a ‘closed’ donor is an uncool party pooper in the least… i totally respect dudes who jack in a cup to give a nice fertility-challenged couple a child. I’m just saying if everyone is not on board, it must be respected).
On another note, and this is an aspect of the donor process that i learned from you Sara – if there is a health issue, i can truly understand how frustrating it may be if you know your dad is out there, and has the genetic answers to a health related question, but you can’t access him even though he may be willing to be accessed. Very crappy scenario indeed… but again, how can you resolve such an issue while maintaining protection for the donor? Impossible, I am sure. (as an aside: I am pretty sure this scenario should be submitted as a story line for House. Very dramatic. And just tricky enough to be solved by Gregory House himself.)
As a final thought, it should also be considered that there are many other conceptions that do not result in a known father. A nice lady could very well go to a bar, get herself knocked up, and never have contact with the babydaddy again. (or all-inclusive vacay hookups!). This theoretical child may have just as little chance of finding their father than a closed donorsperm baby … regardless of whether the fellow from the bar, or Mexican resort, would like contact or not. I have no point to this story…. i guess i am just saying that the BC girl is not at all alone in this world – and not that makes it better, but misery loves company, right?
Bottom line is — sometimes you’re just never going to know where the sperm came from.
i am very happy that Will has the option to meet his spermdaddy. And I really hope that you get to meet him too! (mainly b.c i really want to know if he is as hot as I have pictured him to be…)
I have to agree with you, Sarah. It is 100% the donor’s call. If he wants the donation to be open, fine. If he wants to be anonymous, then that absolutely has to be respected no matter what. The woman who conceived her child knew what the law was. And despite the fact that the current law allows for open donors doesn’t change anything in her case.As you said, it just wouldn’t be fair to the donor.
No child asks to be born into their situation, regardless of whether their parents are rich or poor, old or young, hetero or gay, coupled or single. But children who are born via artificial insemination are blessed with something that regularly conceived children are not — the knowledge that their parent(s) went to extraordinary physical, emotional and financial lengths to bring them into the world using a method that wasn’t even available decades ago. For a child of a single parent born this way, not knowing the identity of your biological father is a small price to pay to receive the amazing gift of life.
So would this be at all similar to a closed adoption? Or are adoption records different (obviously…but you know what I mean). Are some close adoptions the same? The children will never know anything about their bio parents?
I’m not well educated on this and, to be honest – am unfamiliar with the BC case – but I would imagine that the law should stay as is and the mother can decide – as you did -whether to to have an anonymous donor or an open donor.
On the other hand – for the sake of the children being born via sperm donation – perhaps the girl has a point. They aren’t asking to be brought into the world this way. They didn’t choose to live a life with a potential missing piece. And it’s a big piece.
Tough call.
I’m off to google the BC case!