Sperm donor anonymity overturned by B.C. court
- Thread starter Praxius
- Start date
Lots of people are treated differently everyday over a myriad of issues. I do not see where this breaches the right to liberty or security. She is just as free as anyone else to do as she pleases with her life and just a secure as anyone else. The judge clearly made an erroneous conjunction between someone wanting to know something and their safety and freedom. The litmus test for any application of the charter is will it deny others of their rights and this clearly does. She did not make this ruling on any precedent or legal foundation that I can see and I question her sobriety and ability to hold a seat on the bench. There will be 2 possible results of this ruling, either the SCC will strike it down as they should if it is challenged or sperm donation will become non-existent and many couples will not get to have the children they want.
Does the poor boo-boo need a hanky? We all have crosses to bear, get over it.
The situations are not the same. In adoption we are talking about a single child who is being given up for whatever personal reason. In donation we could be talking about many children who are here because somebody wanted to help those who could not otherwise have children. One act is selfish and the other selfless. That is a huge difference. You are quite mistaken in assuming we have a legal right to know anything about our past.
Very much so. A selfless decision would be to take personal responsibility and change your life to raise the child properly. There is obviously some thought for the well-being of the child involved and there are some exceptions I am sure but in general terms the birth parent is thinking about themselves and negative effects on their life of having to care for a child.
no one is owed the right, but no one has the right to keep information from a person concerning
their 'own' beginnings, its not about owing, its about freeing up normal information about a
persons own information.
Okay, I get it.
It's selfish to recognize that your child might have a better chance at life being raised by someone more capable.
Makes perfect sense to me.
each pregnancy is a single life, and cannot be generalized into 'because' its many children, its also
many children in adoptions too, when the dust settles it is one person wanting his/her own personal information about his/her own beginnings of life, and their connections to siblings/parents/ancestors,
which in my opinion cannot be withheld from anyone, the sad part for me is the fact that much of this
information is withheld, or cannot be found, and a person is left with that blank spot in his/her
history, that they cannot fill in, but the history is there, and is there for everyone.
the key word there is 'might', no guarantees, and the birth parent walks away not knowing
what kind of life their child will have, its a gamble, but to 'please and satisfy' themselves,
they tell themselves that the child is better off going off somewhere else, and not with them,
as they don't really want them anyway, have made many decisions why the child should 'leave', and
then walks away without any responsibilities for their own child.
No, its selfish not to accept responsibility for your actions and make the required changes to your life and lifestyle to raise the child properly. I did also say that there will always be some exceptions to this but in general it is mostly a selfish decision.
if one disagrees with this decision to protect the birth and other parent from having to share
information with their child, I don't agree, because by the time the child is 18, it is not
about 'them, the parent) any more, and they should be mature and confident enough in their paranting to
to know it will not make a difference, unless they have done a poor job of paranting,
which i'm sure happens in some cases, then they deserve whatever feelings they have, they cannot
'make' any individual they have raised, (even your own birth children)do 'what' you say, they
have the right to do what 'they' want at that point in their lives, and if you try to push your
beliefs onto them, you will push them out of your life anyway.
information with their child, I don't agree, because by the time the child is 18, it is not
about 'them, the parent) any more, and they should be mature and confident enough in their paranting to
to know it will not make a difference, unless they have done a poor job of paranting,
which i'm sure happens in some cases, then they deserve whatever feelings they have, they cannot
'make' any individual they have raised, (even your own birth children)do 'what' you say, they
have the right to do what 'they' want at that point in their lives, and if you try to push your
beliefs onto them, you will push them out of your life anyway.
How about the realization they are just not cut out for raising children and living a normal family life? Sure, some might take responsiblity and change but do you really want people raising children who are doing it strictly because they feel obligated but their heart isn't in it? Unless the parents' philosophy changes they are eventually going back to being "themselves" and someone will get hurt, mentally, physically or emotionally. There will always be that underlying feeling of blame toward the kids. Better to adopt them out to someone who wants them and all the responsibilities involved.
This country is supposed to be about rights and freedoms, so I can't see withholding these from people when it's no skin off anyone else's ass. :smile:
You still seem to working from an assumption that there is some guaranteed right to know our past and history, there isn't. Some people know and others don't. Just one of those things in life you have to deal with.
There could be many legal ramifications surrounding support and such that will now be opened. It could have all kinds of adverse financial and emotional results just because he tried to help someone 20 years ago. I am sorry but this ruling is putting one person's imaginary rights over another person's actual rights so it is not even a question of equality because one person's right to privacy is being violated for the benefit of another person which is contrary to the constitution.
I think the point is that the whole thing was an anonymous sperm bank, which now isn't anonymous. Some people would be happy to put their name to donated sperms, others might not want to. And this decision seems to be making a retroactive change. That's the issue.
Rights vs Freedoms.
I understood that this forum has a rabid anti-abortion contingent, but I had no idea that so many were against adoption, too.
I can only answer for me. I am not anti adoption but I do recognize it is quite often a selfish decision on the part of the birth mother. It doesn't make the decision wrong or invalid and is quite often the right decision for the child in the short term.
I am against abortion as a method of general contraception but I remain pro-choice to support the freedoms of others to make that decision for themselves even if it differs from what I would choose.
I am only giving my opinion re: the human right to know, and not going into other areas concerning
financial rights, that is definitely another department and another thread, and no one has to owe
to anyone the right to know about themselves, it is the right and freedom of everyone to know about
themselves, and no one has the right to purposely withhold that information. They did not make the
decision to bring 'themselves' into this world, but now that they are here, leave them to be free just
like the rest of us, and don't handcuff them, and tell them what they are allowed to know or not know
about themselves.
I can find out everything that is available for me in genealogy and vital statistics, and I shouldn't
have more priviledge than any adopted or sperm donated human, we are all individuals on this earth,
none should be more priviledged than others, just because someone decided they are or aren't, that
is not free.
I would be the first parent to step forward and help my adopted or sperm donated child find all that
he/she could find concerning his personal life, and if I had the information in my own files, at
whatever age he/she asked, I would show him/her, and if my kid did not want to know, I would not
force him/her to know, that is the individuals personal right for him/herself.
It is important to me to know who my birth parents were, it is also who I am genetically, and has
nothing to do with my love and loyalty and devotion to any parent who had adopted me, etc, there
is no limit on love.
In many cases the person hunting down his/her birth parent/s, might find them,
figure it all out, and in a short time, decide that it isn't all that interesting,
and move away from them, and be satisfied that he found them, end of story, no
more hunting, but found valuable information about them and him/herself, and
was glad he ended up with the parents who raised him/her.
Perhaps the reason the man is a donor is that he does not want to raise a family? Perhaps he just wants to allow someone else that ability to do so. If I was a donor, and 20 years down the road someone came knocking on my door, I would NOT be happy to see them. I would be a donor, not a father(or even a father figure). It would be different if I had been the father of a baby that was given up for adoption. I had some responsibilty in that, but with being a donor all that I am responsible for(or would care about) is that I donated my sperm to ones that had need of it.
It is a secret because the person donating the sperm wanted it that way. Now, there will be a lot less donating than there already is, and I would imagine that some of the men that already donated might ask for their samples to be destroyed.
Your wisdom knows no bounds, Talloola, all the subject wants to know is his ancestry,it's not like she/he will be looking for money or the man's time or anything and besides the subject will likely have a lot of life to live long after the donor is dead and gone, so to deny them this is just plain selfishness! :smile:
a sincere donor knows he will be a father, in some respects, and if he doesn't want to be notified 20
years down the road, don't donate, I don't think it will reduce donors, but it will increase the quality
of donors, and limit it to those who are open minded, honest, and don't see anything else but a true
effort to help someone else.
It would be interesting to hear from your offspring whom you took part in creating, no problem, and
donor can enlighten the offspring about his relatives and ancestry, not anything further than that,
it opens up life for the young person, which would have nothing more than a positive feeling and
good information, and he/she can go back, (if he wants to) to the life he grew up with, or make
a new close friend out of his birth father, or make his family bigger by having more people in his
genetics and family, to make his/her life happier. No more blank spots.
Persons donating the sperm, shouldn't make the decision that they don't want any information given
to the offspring, that closes the door for the young person, not right.
If he wants to be anonymous, don't donate, leave it someone with a more open mind, who doesn't mind,
and welcomes contact years down the road.
Never mind then.
Honestly though, it seems reasonable to me that a person ought to have a right to know who their biological parents are.
Sorry, I disagree. The person donating the sperm should have the right to privacy, since when he donated the sperm the contract stated that it would be anonymous. He is not a father figure at all. He donated his sperm, he did not choose to have anything else to do with any child begot by that donation.
And saying that just because the donor chooses to be anonymous he isn't open-minded or honest? That isn't a very open-minded comment either.
The donor is NOT a father, so why would he want to make a close new friend with the person(people) that were conceived by his sperm? Calling him a father could open him to child support claims among other things. It's ridiculous. The donor suddenly doesn't have any say in the matter?
So the donor shouldn't matter at all? Privacy is privacy. If I was born from donated sperm I would just count my lucky stars that someone donated, otherwise I wouldn't even be around to bitch and moan about how I don't know who the donor was and how it is so unfair.
So, a right to know would trump right to privacy?