B.C. woman continues fight to learn identity of biological father

[Dixie Cup]

I support donor anonymity. But I also support the child's right to know about inherited health issues. The child should be able to anonymously get health information regarding heart attacks, high blood pressure, diabetes... from the genetic parent.

I think the health information should have been given to the prospective parents at the time of the sperm donation so as to avoid this situation completely. However, even if it was given, what is the chance that she'd still want more information anyway? I hope the Supreme Court rules against her since the annonimity needs to be respected.

JMO

Rules shouldn't be changed after the fact.

 

[Machjo]

Nothing we can do about past contracts and laws, but I could see a law prohibiting any guarantee of privacy in such cases from this point forward. This would still protect past donors, but would no longer afford this protection to future donors while requiring them to sign a statement of understanding if they wish to donate to avoid any pretense of not having been warned. That way if they want to remain anonymous they'd have the option of not donating, simple as that.

 

[taxslave]

By identifying the donor it leaves open the whole area of inheritance. Could also create many problems in the donors life 20 years downstream.

 

[shadowshiv]

I support donor anonymity. But I also support the child's right to know about inherited health issues. The child should be able to anonymously get health information regarding heart attacks, high blood pressure, diabetes... from the genetic parent.

I agree that the donor should be anonymous. It's not like she can't get the medical information even if the donor remains unknown, so there is no reason why she should be allowed to find out his identity. If the donor allowed his identity to be known, fine, but why should her desire to find out(and like I said above, she can find out medical information without his identity being known) trump the donor's desire for privacy?

I hope the Supreme Court of Canada upholds the decision just brought down.

Personally I think she should have the right to know who her biological father is. If I were in her position I'd be doing the same thing. If the guy wants to remain anonymous then he shouldn't have fathered any children. She didnt ask to be created or born in the way it was done.

And if he didn't, she wouldn't be here at all. My sister was adopted, and even though she was able to meet with her birth mother, does that mean that her life would be any less meaningful if she hadn't? Sorry, but it doesn't sound like she's had a bad life. And if I was in her position, I would just be thankful that he DID donate so that I DID have a life.

Nothing we can do about past contracts and laws, but I could see a law prohibiting any guarantee of privacy in such cases from this point forward. This would still protect past donors, but would no longer afford this protection to future donors while requiring them to sign a statement of understanding if they wish to donate to avoid any pretense of not having been warned. That way if they want to remain anonymous they'd have the option of not donating, simple as that.

I wonder how many people would never be born at all if this were to happen, as I am pretty sure that the amount of donations would fall drastically if this were to become true. It is fine the way it is.

 

[SLM]

I agree that the donor should be anonymous. It's not like she can't get the medical information even if the donor remains unknown, so there is no reason why she should be allowed to find out his identity. If the donor allowed his identity to be known, fine, but why should her desire to find out(and like I said above, she can find out medical information without his identity being known) trump the donor's desire for privacy?

I hope the Supreme Court of Canada upholds the decision just brought down.

As much as I can understand her feelings of wanting to know, I think in the end she's being selfish. This man is not her 'father', he was a sperm donor. He may well be a stellar individual on a personal level, but that doesn't change the basic fact of the situation.

And if he didn't, she wouldn't be here at all. My sister was adopted, and even though she was able to meet with her birth mother, does that mean that her life would be any less meaningful if she hadn't? Sorry, but it doesn't sound like she's had a bad life. And if I was in her position, I would just be thankful that he DID donate so that I DID have a life.

There's also the aspect of forcing against his will to disclose his personal information. I have to wonder what she thinks will happen if she succeeds, that they will bond?

People tend to juxtapose their own 'ideal' into other people's individual situations. I don't remember my father, my parents divorced when I was an infant and once my mother was granted full custody he simply stopped coming around. I have absolutely no desire to get to know the man at all. What I've found is that the majority of people who grew up with a dad in their lives cannot comprehend that I feel no emptiness for not having known mine.

I wonder how many people would never be born at all if this were to happen, as I am pretty sure that the amount of donations would fall drastically if this were to become true. It is fine the way it is.

Apparently so.

During that battle, Albert Yuzpe, co-founder of Vancouver's Genesis Fertility Centre, told the Globe and Mailthat revoking the promise of anonymity could have a negative effect on the number of donors.
"The problem is, in countries where they have legislated [disclosure] the number of volunteer donors has gone down quite significantly," he said at the time.

 

[Machjo]

By identifying the donor it leaves open the whole area of inheritance. Could also create many problems in the donors life 20 years downstream.

But should the donor have to sign a statement of understanding before donating, then he's accepting the consequences.

I wonder how many people would never be born at all if this were to happen, as I am pretty sure that the amount of donations would fall drastically if this were to become true. It is fine the way it is.

I'm more than pretty sure. But a child has ought to have a right to know who his father is. So if it drops, it drops. More adoptions then.

 

[taxslave]

But should the donor have to sign a statement of understanding before donating, then he's accepting the consequences.



I'm more than pretty sure. But a child has ought to have a right to know who his father is. So if it drops, it drops. More adoptions then.

What consequences? He is anonymous and wishes to stay that way.

 

[Machjo]

What consequences? He is anonymous and wishes to stay that way.

I was thinking about new cases after my proposal. clearly those who've already signed up ought to have their privacy honoured.