Donor Sibling Registry talks to the ASRM

NPR interview with me and Sean Tipton of the American Society of Reproductive Medicine.
http://www.npr.org/2011/11/21/142594613/fighting-over-rights-of-sperm-donor-babies

Astounding, that in 2011 it is still easier for the ASRM to doubt, deny, negate and question what has been happening on the DSR for 11 years. I invite them to read through our website, read the research that we have published, read through the message board, look at the large numbers of sibling groups (er, or talk to sperm banks like Fairfax Cryobank or Xytex), and pay some attention to the more than 34,000 donors, parents and offspring on the DSR.

Some background:
Sean Tipton, the spokesperson for the ASRM (quoted in a 2007 Science Progress article): “I don’t draw any conclusions from the Donor Sibling Registry. I don’t know if there is any counterpart organization for happy children of sperm donors”.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Donor Sibling Registry talks to the ASRM

  1. marilynn says:

    I forgot reading that article before and then I saw my own comment

    “marilynn huff (marilynndawn) wrote:
    “TIPTON: There are many, many children who don’t know who their father is. In fact, most medical studies would indicate that as many as 10 percent of the population is mistaken as to who their biological father is.”

    He’s right! Gamete donation is like the best of criminal abandonment and paternity fraud rolled together in one easy to use and completely legal violation of civil liberties and human rights.

    Tue Nov 22 2011 03:23:27 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time)
    Recommended (4)”

    When he said “Well, as far as I know, no one has ever consented to the circumstances of their own conception. I happen to have teenage boys who I suspect currently probably would not consent to me being their father. I don’t know too many teenage boys who would consent to whoever their father is.”

    That is so tricky to make the issue about conception rather than abandonment. Of course nobody has a say in how their parents conceived them. They did not even exist back then and besides, the donor and their mother did not become parents until their offspring was born. No man becomes a father prior to the birh of his offspring. It is not until they are born that he becomes obligated to provide financial and physical support. I think what donor offspring have a right to say is hey, why is it that some people are entitled to physical and financial support from their biological fathers but I’m not? How come some of my biological father’s other offspring are entitled to his support but I’m not? How come they get to know all of our paternal relatives but I don’t?” I don’t see why donor offspring would allow the industry to keep leading them back to a conversation about conception and describing them as donor conceived rather than parent abandoned. Whatever those men were before their offspring were born is their own private problem; if they were donors or lovers or husbands it really makes no difference because the the problem is what they did after their offspring was born, which was nothing and its not unreasonable for people to expect the people that raised them to have more responsibility for then than they do with laws as they are for gamete donors. Having some men comply with certain laws but not others means their offspring are getting the short end of the stick, straw vial….

    “hey why don’t we ask Mr. Tipton to help listeners understand how to apply the ASRM formula to their city state and country to get the ASRM maximum recommended number of offspring per donor in their city and state and country; that way Mr. Tipton will have the information

Comments are closed.