Currently a court case to challenge non-disclosure of anonymous sperm donors.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/nati...article1733841/Excerpt below:
The British Columbia government is asking a judge to throw out a landmark legal challenge seeking to end the anonymity of sperm donors.
Olivia Pratten, 28, wants the B.C. Supreme Court to order the province to create a system that ensures donor records are kept indefinitely and to prevent existing records from being destroyed.
She also wants children conceived through donation to have the ability to obtain information about a donor's identity and medical history – effectively making it impossible for them to remain anonymous.
Ms. Pratten, a Toronto-based journalist who works for The Canadian Press, launched the lawsuit after fighting for more than a decade to obtain records about her conception, arguing such information is vital to her health and to ease the psychological stress of not knowing who her biological father is.
Ms. Pratten's mother, Shirley, became pregnant through sperm donation after she and her husband failed to conceive.
I guess maybe I seriously don't embrace these assisted reproductive technologies:
anonymous sperm donation- leads to situations where child/whoever wants to know father's identity. Valid, but when it is launched as a court case, I do wonder what maybe the underlying reason other than to complete one's own understanding of their identity.
Above excerpt, states the information access law and patient/donor information that is only kept for a limited time period.
There is another Canadian court case right now, where there was donor sperm mix-up. The child is only 3 yrs. but mother is upset that child will not "know" her real father/identity. They thought she was impregnated with hubby's sperm. (I dunno, just how important is this ..in the end, particularily if child becomes an ok, well-adjusted adult.)
surrogant mothers: women who are pregnant with someone else's child (well, one could argue it's her child also) because another woman cannot conceive. And she is paid for carrying the child until birth.
Both of the above assisted reproductive technologies are fraught with real potential problems.
Perhaps I am fatalistic..but if natural conception is not possible, then it was meant to be. Hard and painful for some to accept, but the 2 options above are just fraught with potential problems down the road.
Maybe I'm only seeing the negative. That said, for children who are conceived under such circumstances, they deserve the same quality childraising as any other child.
Previous Topic
Index
