BC Court injunction for sperm doners

[BlackEleven]

Originally Posted by fotze

But the court's mandate is not to keep the gizz flowing.

It should be. A gizz flowing society is a happy society and a happy society is a productive society.

[Locke]

I think more people who donate are going to give conspicuously erroneous personal information.

"Your father was.....Darth Vader? Well I'll be damned...."

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by lchoy

I'm going to argue devil's advocate here, but I can see 1 exception where the donor identity could be revealed, and that's for unique medical reasons. If the child from IVF develops a rare cancer or disease and is need of a specific transplant, than the father may be contacted on compassionate grounds, and asked if he could help.
Otherwise, I'm in favour of keeping donor's identity confidential

Originally Posted by mykalberta

I dont agree under any circumstance those record should be released.

Sperm clinics should are responsible for testing and doing a medical background. I dont care if the result of the sperm donation is dying from a rare African strain of JeepersCreepers, under no circumstance should the privacy of the donor be violated.

Well the father could still help and the confidentiality could still remain intact. You wouldn't need the mother or the child to be in contact to get some sort of medical help. That could be done through a third party. It would be a similar system to marrow matching. The identities of the donor and recipient are not shared. However if they are going to do this it should be an option for the father to choose upfront, not after.

[North East Goon]

"Let your gizz flow...like a mountain stream" To quote the Bellamy Brothers.

[Jetsfan]

Originally Posted by The Ditch

She's probably hoping he is mega rich and she could sue him for child support payments or something, at least that is what I would be hoping.

Exactly right!!!

[CaptainCrunch]

Is there a 5 second floor rule on your umm specimen. I mean if you miss the jar and fire it onto the floor or ceiling or roof, do you have 5 seconds to get it into the jar before its no good.

Would anyone know?

[Calgaryborn]

The problem for these adult children is the loss of connectedness with the past. In other words: a family gives more than physical traits. It provides a link to the past. How many of us have researched our family histories? Why do we do that? Because it is part of who we are. I don't think many of these adults of donor fathers are looking for a way to make a quick buck. They want to know if their ancestors were saints or crooks. They want to know when their family came to Canada and why. How their great grandfather lived and died. Did anyone die in our country's wars and if so how? What branch of the services did they serve in? Does the old homestead still exist? There are millions of questions we have all taken for granted that they have never been able to ask. A contractual agreement and medical procedure caused them to grow up without knowing their biological father. He may want to maintain no relationship with his donor child but, should he be able to deny them knowledge of their roots? I don't think that is fair. My family history is part of what I will pass on to my sons along with the chapter which they share with me.

[Flash]

Originally Posted by The Ditch

She's probably hoping he is mega rich and she could sue him for child support payments or something, at least that is what I would be hoping.

I doubt that's what she's looking for. She's an adult, not a child.

I've never met my biological father...he took off on my mom before I was born...and I've looked for and found him (still never met him though). It had nothing to do with money or years worth of presents or anything like that. It was only about meeting the other person who made me and to untimately find out why he never tried to contact me.

Where sperm doners are concerned though...I don't think the guys who donate are in it to help create a child, I think they're more about getting a little bit of money for a quick pull. I think their information should be kept confidential...I'd freak if someone had to come forward after 26 years and be like "I'm your kid." It's unfortunate, but it's a part of them that was never meant to be known, and to try to get the information after a person requested and understood that it would be kept confidential is not fair on the person who made the deposit.

[The Fonz]

Has anyone on this board ever made a deposit at the sperm bank?

[The Fonz]

I agree, the identity should be kept confidential. I mean, they said he was a medical student, so he very well could've done this when he was 19 years old, in school, and short on cash. Fast forward 27-30 years, and this guy (assuming he finished school) is a successful/wealthy doctor, most likely with a wife and children. If this girl showed up on his doorstep, with proof of being his daughter, that would shake up this guys life pretty good. Chances are good his wife wouldn't know about the whole sperm bank thing either. I'm pretty sure if I met a girl in my mid-late 20's, I wouldn't bring up the fact that I donated my boys to a sperm bank nearly a decade prior.

[Flash]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

I agree, the identity should be kept confidential. I mean, they said he was a medical student, so he very well could've done this when he was 19 years old, in school, and short on cash. Fast forward 27-30 years, and this guy (assuming he finished school) is a successful/wealthy doctor, most likely with a wife and children. If this girl showed up on his doorstep, with proof of being his daughter, that would shake up this guys life pretty good. Chances are good his wife wouldn't know about the whole sperm bank thing either. I'm pretty sure if I met a girl in my mid-late 20's, I wouldn't bring up the fact that I donated my boys to a sperm bank nearly a decade prior.

I agree with you. The guy's whole life could be turned upside down by this woman, and you can bet if he's got a wife and kids the wife is going to want to figure out how many "half siblings" her kids have due to his deposits. It's sad, but as I said, it's part of her that was never really meant to be known.

[NuclearFart]

The fact that this is even being entertained is going to hurt the donation rate. I sure as heck wouldnt consider it now, seeing as how there is serious contemplation about removing the confidentiality. Even if it doesnt pass this year, I'm sure someone will keep trying every decade until it passes.

I'll take a day of blue balls & empty wallet over a lifetime of worrying about a long lost kid appearing on my doorstep someday.

[NuclearFart]

Originally Posted by fotze

Maybe thats a good thing, in fact I think it is.

Couldn;t the agency just get around this by having a "burn all records every two years" policy?

Good in what way? It will give credance to not allowing the fathers identity to be revealed?

As for burning the records, I don't think so because it is technically a medical record. I think patient medical records have to be kept for 6 or 7 years before its acceptable to destroy them without consulting the patient. Not sure if that's a law though, or the college of physician & surgeons policy.

I think a better answer is just to allow truly anonymous donation - ie no paper trail with any identifiers.

[CaptainCrunch]

Yeah, some of these donors have probably filled the jar 50 times, and they don't know the mother, why would they want to have any kind of connection with a kid created from a financial transaction. They're not performing some miracle of life out of love or desire to create off spring, they're yanking to a penthouse magazine for $50.00 and the woman voluntarily gets seeded with a turkey baster. Once the mans made his donation and gotten his check his identity is irrelevant. If the mother wants the child to know the father maybe she should introduce the kid to her husband or boyfriend or Anne Heche.

[NuclearFart]

Originally Posted by fotze

So if you came out of a person's wang that happened to get $50 you have less rights than someone else. Why does the guy getting paid $50 get more 'protection' from a future kid than some guy who got drunk in the bar and banged some girl. The kid had no say in either situation. One sure isn't more noble than the other. I do believe that these guys should not be screwed because of a technicality going backward, but going forward I don't believe you can enter a person who does not yet exist, into a contract. I don't believe in the rights of the unborn but I do to those of the living.

Do you really think these are comparable? One is two adults being consensually irresponsible, the other is two adults making a very informed decision - the male legitimately providing an essential service to humanity, the woman so desperate for a child she's willing to make a huge sacrifice.

And while you may say you can't enter an unborn child into a contract, I'm pretty sure the future child would take being born and not knowing the biological father, over never being born at all because they'd been stripped of their dignified right to know who the real father is.

That's the terms of their creation, and the ends of the bargain must be upheld for the future donor babies.

[Ryan Coke]

Well said NF.The whole concept of losing confidentiality is moronic and selfish. Basically it will stop couples who would have otherwise been unable to have children from making it happen, just so that this grown brat can answer some curiosities or whatever.

Maybe they should just make the deal--the anonymous donor must forfeit his expectation of confidentiality, and in return you must forfeit the life that was created based on that confidentiality.