The increasing number of children born through sperm donation, and the fact that many of those children are just now reaching adulthood, is leading to a revolution in the way we define families. A Tuesday Post story examined how children conceived this way are beginning to search for the donors. (University of California Press)
But what do the donors think? How much responsibility do they feel? A new book is providing some answers. “Sex Cells: The Medical Market for Eggs and Sperm,” (University of California Press, September 2011) by Rene Almeling, an Assistant Professor of Sociology at Yale University, provides insights into the relationships between donors, recipients and the children conceived. Over fours years, Almeling studied six sperm banks and interviewed their founders and staffers. She also interviewed 40 donors.
One of the fascinating aspects of Almeling’s research is that she explored how donors, both egg and sperm, perceive their own roles in a family. She found that, despite conventional wisdom, it’s the male donors who feel a stronger connection.
“One of the most surprising things I found was that sperm donors have a straightforward view of themselves as fathers, while egg donors insist they are not mothers,” she wrote me in an e-mail conversation we had about her book. She went on to suggest some explanations for the difference:
“My research points to a long-standing cultural assumption in which the male contribution to reproduction is seen as primary. Indeed, the ancient Greeks, who thought of men as providing the generative seed and women the nurturing soil, would recognize a modern-day incarnation of this formulation in fertility agencies. Sperm donors think of their seed as essential to the child, down playing the role of the recipients. Egg donors insist that their contribution is “just an egg,” pointing to the recipient as the mother, because she is the one who nurtures by carrying the pregnancy, giving birth and raising the child.
Here’s more from Washington Posts Q&A:
Q. With male donors seeing themselves as “fathers,” does it follow that they might be more open to establishing relationships with the children that are created from their sperm?
Almeling: No. In fact, I found that both sperm donors and egg donors were generally willing to meet children who requested it, or at the very least, to provide updated medical information. It is just that the men couched those feelings of responsibility in terms of being a parent, whereas the women did not.
Q. As more and more families are formed using donors, what sorts of ramifications might these perspectives have for the families involved and our cultural definition of family?
Almeling: Reproductive technologies have made it possible to partition motherhood into different elements. The woman who provides the egg, the woman who carries the pregnancy, and the woman who raises the child can each lay claim (or not) to the label of “mother.”
However, in our culture, it is still the case that providing the sperm makes one a father. As more and more families are created through what is called “assisted reproduction,” it will be interesting to see whether definitions of paternity emerge that are as flexible as our definitions of maternity.
Q. Given your research, do you think donors should have more rights? More information? More guidance?
Almeling:Based on my interviews with donors, one of the recommendations I would make is that men be encouraged to seriously consider the ramifications of sperm donation.
Most egg agencies require that women undergo psychological screening, with one of the primary goals being to ensure that they have thought through the prospect of biological offspring. Sperm banks do not require this kind of screening. They are content to let men focus on short-term financial gain rather than long-term implications, and I think it does sperm donors a disservice.
In terms of egg donation, there is a critical lack of data about the long-term effects of taking fertility medications. The egg agencies where I did research did a good job of informing women of risks associated with egg donation, but for women’s consent to be truly informed, those clinical studies need to be done.
Article: 28.09.11 www.washingtonpost.com by Janice D'Arcy
Thursday 29 September 2011
Tuesday 27 September 2011
Two sets of twins 2000 miles apart share same sperm donor
Twins Jonah and Hilit Jacobson love sushi and bite their nails. Over 2,000 miles away, twins Jesse and Jayme Clapoff also love sushi and chew their nails.
All four teens look incredibly similar with the same brown hair, full mouth and great athletic ability. A coincidence? Not at all. All four are the offspring of the same sperm donor and if it wasn’t for a new website that unites ‘donor siblings’ they would never have met.
Jonah and Hilit, now 16, were born and raised in Atlanta, Georgia, US, by Eric and Terri Jacobson. When the couple started trying for a baby they discovered they had fertility problems. Tests showed Eric had a condition where he didn’t produce sperm. “When you want to have a baby and you can’t, it’s hard,” says Terri, 47. “You try it all and it costs money.”
The couple’s options included adoption – in the US it would cost $25,000 (just over £16,000) – or donor insemination. They chose the latter. And from a brochure at a fertility clinic they ordered sperm from donor 1096. “We saw he was Jewish, 6ft tall, healthy, bright, smart, sporty and worked in industrial design. He came from California,” recalls Terri. “When Eric and I found out we were pregnant, we were both ecstatic, thrilled beyond belief. “I was ecstatic to learn I was having twins and to find they were a healthy boy and girl. It took five years to have them so the thought of raising two was a blessing.” Unbeknown to them, several other would-be-parents liked the sound of donor 1096, too.
In California, 2,300 miles away, devoted career woman Janis Clapoff was heading for 40 and her biological clock was thumping. “I really wanted to have children,” she says. “But there was nobody in my life at the time.” So she decided to use a donor and liked the sound of a tall, sporty, clever, handsome donor. Donor 1096. And in a year, along came twins, Jayme and Jesse, both now 16.
This could’ve been where the story ended. Two sets of twins, living thousands of miles apart. But curiosity and a new website meant the twins would eventually meet. Mum Terri had always wondered whether they had other siblings. She has always been open about the circumstances surrounding their conception. “Eric and I used the word donor from the time the twins could talk, so it was a natural introduction for the children,” she explains. But while Terri wanted to know more about the twins’ biological father – and any siblings – Eric was less keen. “My husband didn’t want to know the wider connection,” she says. In 2000, when her twins were five, Terri joined the Donor Sibling Registry, a way for sperm donor family members to connect in a way they hadn’t done before.
In order to find their half-siblings — if they have any – members use the ID number of the sperm donor. After typing in donor 1096 in to the webpage, Terri found her twins’ first sibling when they were eight. A girl called Maddi, whose mum Mara – a single mum – lived in New York. However, Maddi looked just like her mum and didn’t share physical traits with the twins, or donor 1096. But Maddi was athletic like her half-sister Hilit. “There was fondness between them,” Terri says.
During this time, Terri toyed with having another baby and bought more sperm from donor 1096, but she failed to get pregnant. However, after spending a tiring day with her 18-month-old niece, she realised having her twins was enough. Meanwhile, Janis Clapoff also decided to find out about her twins’ dad, donor 1096, and any siblings.
She too registered with the Donor Sibling Registry and the families found each other. Then, four years ago, Janis made the trip to Georgia with her twins to meet Terri’s. “The first time they were all in the same room I couldn’t believe it,” says Terri. “They had the same body type, they even have the same Mick Jagger-style lips.” Hilit adds: “The first time meeting Jayme and Jesse was exciting but nerve-wracking. Since my twin Jonah and I had met Maddi two years before, we were prepared. We hugged hello and went to dinner.
“We all talked about our life at home, friends, family and interests. It’s cool when half-siblings meet because you do feel a connection, not like just meeting strangers.” Jayme adds: “When we went to dinner, we all ordered the same drink, virgin Pina Coladas. That was cool.” Jesse agrees: “The connection was deep. We knew that we were siblings.”
In fact, the similarities were clear for all to see. As well as looking so alike, the two sets of twins are both athletic, outgoing, kind-hearted and passionate. Two years after the Clapoff twins visited the Jacobsons in Georgia, the Jacobsons returned the favour and made the trip to Hawaii, where the Clapoffs were living. “I still can’t remember any awkward or weird moments between us,” Jonah says. “Jesse and I love the ocean and discovered that we both wanted to attend the same uni, which is on the beach.”
It’s the internet that has changed the world for donor conceived children. In the US, there are already about 7,300 sibling connections on the Donor Sibling Registry and that number is expected to rise. And it’s estimated that between 30,000 and 60,000 donor conceived children are born each and every year.
To read more go to http://bit.ly/pFNEJq
All four teens look incredibly similar with the same brown hair, full mouth and great athletic ability. A coincidence? Not at all. All four are the offspring of the same sperm donor and if it wasn’t for a new website that unites ‘donor siblings’ they would never have met.
Jonah and Hilit, now 16, were born and raised in Atlanta, Georgia, US, by Eric and Terri Jacobson. When the couple started trying for a baby they discovered they had fertility problems. Tests showed Eric had a condition where he didn’t produce sperm. “When you want to have a baby and you can’t, it’s hard,” says Terri, 47. “You try it all and it costs money.”
The couple’s options included adoption – in the US it would cost $25,000 (just over £16,000) – or donor insemination. They chose the latter. And from a brochure at a fertility clinic they ordered sperm from donor 1096. “We saw he was Jewish, 6ft tall, healthy, bright, smart, sporty and worked in industrial design. He came from California,” recalls Terri. “When Eric and I found out we were pregnant, we were both ecstatic, thrilled beyond belief. “I was ecstatic to learn I was having twins and to find they were a healthy boy and girl. It took five years to have them so the thought of raising two was a blessing.” Unbeknown to them, several other would-be-parents liked the sound of donor 1096, too.
In California, 2,300 miles away, devoted career woman Janis Clapoff was heading for 40 and her biological clock was thumping. “I really wanted to have children,” she says. “But there was nobody in my life at the time.” So she decided to use a donor and liked the sound of a tall, sporty, clever, handsome donor. Donor 1096. And in a year, along came twins, Jayme and Jesse, both now 16.
This could’ve been where the story ended. Two sets of twins, living thousands of miles apart. But curiosity and a new website meant the twins would eventually meet. Mum Terri had always wondered whether they had other siblings. She has always been open about the circumstances surrounding their conception. “Eric and I used the word donor from the time the twins could talk, so it was a natural introduction for the children,” she explains. But while Terri wanted to know more about the twins’ biological father – and any siblings – Eric was less keen. “My husband didn’t want to know the wider connection,” she says. In 2000, when her twins were five, Terri joined the Donor Sibling Registry, a way for sperm donor family members to connect in a way they hadn’t done before.
In order to find their half-siblings — if they have any – members use the ID number of the sperm donor. After typing in donor 1096 in to the webpage, Terri found her twins’ first sibling when they were eight. A girl called Maddi, whose mum Mara – a single mum – lived in New York. However, Maddi looked just like her mum and didn’t share physical traits with the twins, or donor 1096. But Maddi was athletic like her half-sister Hilit. “There was fondness between them,” Terri says.
During this time, Terri toyed with having another baby and bought more sperm from donor 1096, but she failed to get pregnant. However, after spending a tiring day with her 18-month-old niece, she realised having her twins was enough. Meanwhile, Janis Clapoff also decided to find out about her twins’ dad, donor 1096, and any siblings.
She too registered with the Donor Sibling Registry and the families found each other. Then, four years ago, Janis made the trip to Georgia with her twins to meet Terri’s. “The first time they were all in the same room I couldn’t believe it,” says Terri. “They had the same body type, they even have the same Mick Jagger-style lips.” Hilit adds: “The first time meeting Jayme and Jesse was exciting but nerve-wracking. Since my twin Jonah and I had met Maddi two years before, we were prepared. We hugged hello and went to dinner.
“We all talked about our life at home, friends, family and interests. It’s cool when half-siblings meet because you do feel a connection, not like just meeting strangers.” Jayme adds: “When we went to dinner, we all ordered the same drink, virgin Pina Coladas. That was cool.” Jesse agrees: “The connection was deep. We knew that we were siblings.”
In fact, the similarities were clear for all to see. As well as looking so alike, the two sets of twins are both athletic, outgoing, kind-hearted and passionate. Two years after the Clapoff twins visited the Jacobsons in Georgia, the Jacobsons returned the favour and made the trip to Hawaii, where the Clapoffs were living. “I still can’t remember any awkward or weird moments between us,” Jonah says. “Jesse and I love the ocean and discovered that we both wanted to attend the same uni, which is on the beach.”
It’s the internet that has changed the world for donor conceived children. In the US, there are already about 7,300 sibling connections on the Donor Sibling Registry and that number is expected to rise. And it’s estimated that between 30,000 and 60,000 donor conceived children are born each and every year.
To read more go to http://bit.ly/pFNEJq
Saturday 24 September 2011
Scientists may have found a way for women to have children in their 40s
Scientists believe that an ingredient called co-enzyme Q10, might help older women and even those in their 40s produce healthier eggs.
You might have heard of co-enzyme Q10 before, as it's often mentioned as the magic ingredient in posh face creams advertised on the TV.
There's so much advice around about how to get fertile but it sounds like this could really work. The Canadian fertility doctors have discovered that when they give Q10 to mice, it makes the older mice produce more eggs and they're healthier too.
A woman is born with all the eggs she'll ever have and by the time she's in her late 30s the quality of those eggs have severly declined, hence less chance of giving birth to a healthy baby. As more women than ever are leaving it later to have babies, the Q10 breakthrough could help millions.
The Q10 essentially helps to boost the energy in the cells.
Dr Robert Caspar, medical director of the Toronto Centre for Advanced Reproductive Technology explained: "What we found was that just treating the mice with the co-Q10 we got more eggs than when we gave them fertility drugs."
The only glitch so far seems to be that the mice were treated for 18 weeks - doesn't sound like much but in human lifespan terms it relates to 10 years of treatment.
Doctors are now preparing to these the supplement on women 35 and older who are undergoing fertility treatment.
Article: 23rd September www.thinkbaby.co.uk
You might have heard of co-enzyme Q10 before, as it's often mentioned as the magic ingredient in posh face creams advertised on the TV.
There's so much advice around about how to get fertile but it sounds like this could really work. The Canadian fertility doctors have discovered that when they give Q10 to mice, it makes the older mice produce more eggs and they're healthier too.
A woman is born with all the eggs she'll ever have and by the time she's in her late 30s the quality of those eggs have severly declined, hence less chance of giving birth to a healthy baby. As more women than ever are leaving it later to have babies, the Q10 breakthrough could help millions.
The Q10 essentially helps to boost the energy in the cells.
Dr Robert Caspar, medical director of the Toronto Centre for Advanced Reproductive Technology explained: "What we found was that just treating the mice with the co-Q10 we got more eggs than when we gave them fertility drugs."
The only glitch so far seems to be that the mice were treated for 18 weeks - doesn't sound like much but in human lifespan terms it relates to 10 years of treatment.
Doctors are now preparing to these the supplement on women 35 and older who are undergoing fertility treatment.
Article: 23rd September www.thinkbaby.co.uk
Thursday 22 September 2011
Three men talk about helping childless couples by donating sperm
Men willing to donate sperm help to create more than 800 babies in Britain every year through fertility clinics and hundreds more through personal arrangement – but now we are facing a shortage of "sperm donor daddies".
As many as 1 in every 6 people will experience fertility problems, and for many infertile couples, lesbian couples and single women – a sperm donor is the only way of achieving their dream of becoming a parent.
But as their identity is protected through fertility clinic donations, little is known about the men who make conception possible. Only the children they create are allowed to learn their names – and then not until their 18th birthday. Here, the 'Sun' newspaper talks to three men who have donated their sperm.
Ian Mann, 30
IAN, a gay pub quiz host from London, wanted to help childless couples but stopped donating after learning he carries the cystic fibrosis gene. "I got involved with sperm donating a few years ago when I was at the Manchester Pride Festival. "There was a stand for an organisation called Pride Angel which connects sperm and egg donors with infertile and same-sex couples. "I was at the age where I might have been thinking about having kids. "The fact is, I wasn't – but it got me thinking about how could I help.
"I signed up at the website for Pride Angel, which offers a completely free service, but for a while I did not connect with anyone I felt comfortable donating to. "You're put in direct contact with whoever you're considering and you're encouraged to keep in touch with your donor family. "Having a child is a huge commitment and I wanted to be certain whoever I was helping was going to be up to the job.
"Around the same time, I also started donating to the London Women's Clinic (LWC), a renowned IVF clinic on Harley Street. "I was warned that any children resulting from my donations could get in touch when they turned 18. It didn't faze me. "I figured that the chance of them looking me up was pretty slim. "Why would they bother when they had been brought up by two loving parents? "I was told my sperm were pretty strong, so everything seemed great. Then I had a screening by the LWC. "My jaw hit the floor when the results came back that I was carrying a dormant cystic fibrosis gene. "It meant that if my sperm was paired with an egg that had the same gene, the child would have cystic fibrosis.
"The odds were tiny but, of course, it's a chance no one wants to take. All my donations were destroyed and that was the end of that. "I was pretty depressed about it and spoke to my mum. She said there was no history of CF in our family. It was just one of those things. "Since then, I've got in touch with a couple of women through Pride Angel who are desperate to become mums. We're sussing each other out and so far it's going well. "So long as they get tested to make sure they're not CF carriers as well, my faulty gene won't be an issue. "I wish other men would consider being donors. There are so many people out there who would make great parents and just need a little help."
Pride Angel comments: The chance being a cystic fibrosis carrier is 1 in 25 people, so it relatively common. Many people will go through life being totally unaware of carrying the faulty gene, as it will not result in you having a child with cystic fibrosis unless you conceive with another person who in a carrier. When two people with the single mutation have a child, there is a 25% chance that the child will have CF, 50% chance that the child will be a carrier and 25% chance that the child with not be affected.
It is wonderful news to hear about men like Ian who are happy to help childless couples create the family they are longing for
To read more go to http://bit.ly/nOTqpp
As many as 1 in every 6 people will experience fertility problems, and for many infertile couples, lesbian couples and single women – a sperm donor is the only way of achieving their dream of becoming a parent.
But as their identity is protected through fertility clinic donations, little is known about the men who make conception possible. Only the children they create are allowed to learn their names – and then not until their 18th birthday. Here, the 'Sun' newspaper talks to three men who have donated their sperm.
Ian Mann, 30
IAN, a gay pub quiz host from London, wanted to help childless couples but stopped donating after learning he carries the cystic fibrosis gene. "I got involved with sperm donating a few years ago when I was at the Manchester Pride Festival. "There was a stand for an organisation called Pride Angel which connects sperm and egg donors with infertile and same-sex couples. "I was at the age where I might have been thinking about having kids. "The fact is, I wasn't – but it got me thinking about how could I help.
"I signed up at the website for Pride Angel, which offers a completely free service, but for a while I did not connect with anyone I felt comfortable donating to. "You're put in direct contact with whoever you're considering and you're encouraged to keep in touch with your donor family. "Having a child is a huge commitment and I wanted to be certain whoever I was helping was going to be up to the job.
"Around the same time, I also started donating to the London Women's Clinic (LWC), a renowned IVF clinic on Harley Street. "I was warned that any children resulting from my donations could get in touch when they turned 18. It didn't faze me. "I figured that the chance of them looking me up was pretty slim. "Why would they bother when they had been brought up by two loving parents? "I was told my sperm were pretty strong, so everything seemed great. Then I had a screening by the LWC. "My jaw hit the floor when the results came back that I was carrying a dormant cystic fibrosis gene. "It meant that if my sperm was paired with an egg that had the same gene, the child would have cystic fibrosis.
"The odds were tiny but, of course, it's a chance no one wants to take. All my donations were destroyed and that was the end of that. "I was pretty depressed about it and spoke to my mum. She said there was no history of CF in our family. It was just one of those things. "Since then, I've got in touch with a couple of women through Pride Angel who are desperate to become mums. We're sussing each other out and so far it's going well. "So long as they get tested to make sure they're not CF carriers as well, my faulty gene won't be an issue. "I wish other men would consider being donors. There are so many people out there who would make great parents and just need a little help."
Pride Angel comments: The chance being a cystic fibrosis carrier is 1 in 25 people, so it relatively common. Many people will go through life being totally unaware of carrying the faulty gene, as it will not result in you having a child with cystic fibrosis unless you conceive with another person who in a carrier. When two people with the single mutation have a child, there is a 25% chance that the child will have CF, 50% chance that the child will be a carrier and 25% chance that the child with not be affected.
It is wonderful news to hear about men like Ian who are happy to help childless couples create the family they are longing for
To read more go to http://bit.ly/nOTqpp
Tuesday 20 September 2011
Sperm bank tells sperm donors: Red heads need not apply
Sperm bank in Denmark says 'Redheads need not apply' – at least not to the Cryos sperm bank in Denmark, where they have enough red-haired sperm donors on stock already.
Reports of this story have been splashed across world media outlets and put the focus on the redhead ban. But the Danish facility, which is part of an international network of sperm banks, is imposing wider restrictions: they are not taking in any Scandinavians, whether blond, dark-blond red-haired or of any other hair colour, Cryos founder and director Mr Ole Schou told The Irish Times.
“We have too many. We have nearly 500 donors free of quarantine – the world’s largest selection,” he says. “And we have 600 donors on the waiting list. First time in history.”
However it’s the ginger hair that is grabbing the headlines, and the trait is still sought in some areas, according to Schou. “Ireland is among those countries that have the highest demand for red-haired donors – number three on the list behind Denmark and Germany,” he says, noting that the Danish Cryos facility has long supplied Ireland with sperm.
“The problem is that we have too many donors on stock with red hair. If the demand [increases] more than supply, we will take in red-haired again.”
So what kinds of physical traits do prospective parents generally look for in a sperm donor? People seek something similar to themselves, according to Schou, who describes how heterosexual couples look for similarities with the male partner, single parents tend to want sperm donors that look like themselves or “their dream prince” and lesbian couples generally look for a donor that resembles one of the partners.
Graham Coull, lab manager at the Sims clinic in Dublin agrees that for heterosexual couples, sperm donors tend to be matched to the male’s characteristics. He is not surprised by the redhead ban, noting that while Ireland may be one of the top-demanding countries for red-haired donors, in absolute terms the levels of requests here are still fairly low.
“If it’s a heterosexual couple, we match mainly to the male characteristics, and the only time we would be really matching red hair is if the male [partner] has red hair,” says Coull.
“And it’s rare that we would get single women or same-sex partners requesting red hair.” The clinic orders donated sperm through Cryos for use in various fertility procedures, including intra-uterine insemination and in vitro fertilisation.
Patients fill out a sheet detailing preferred characteristics, and Coull finds an appropriate sperm donor. “When it is a heterosexual couple, the most common characteristics in Ireland that we are asked to match are dark hair and blue eyes,” he says.
Article: 20th September 2011 www.irishtimes.com
Lesbian, single, infertile? Looking for a sperm donor? or willing to donate sperm by personal arrangement? visit www.prideangel.com
Reports of this story have been splashed across world media outlets and put the focus on the redhead ban. But the Danish facility, which is part of an international network of sperm banks, is imposing wider restrictions: they are not taking in any Scandinavians, whether blond, dark-blond red-haired or of any other hair colour, Cryos founder and director Mr Ole Schou told The Irish Times.
“We have too many. We have nearly 500 donors free of quarantine – the world’s largest selection,” he says. “And we have 600 donors on the waiting list. First time in history.”
However it’s the ginger hair that is grabbing the headlines, and the trait is still sought in some areas, according to Schou. “Ireland is among those countries that have the highest demand for red-haired donors – number three on the list behind Denmark and Germany,” he says, noting that the Danish Cryos facility has long supplied Ireland with sperm.
“The problem is that we have too many donors on stock with red hair. If the demand [increases] more than supply, we will take in red-haired again.”
So what kinds of physical traits do prospective parents generally look for in a sperm donor? People seek something similar to themselves, according to Schou, who describes how heterosexual couples look for similarities with the male partner, single parents tend to want sperm donors that look like themselves or “their dream prince” and lesbian couples generally look for a donor that resembles one of the partners.
Graham Coull, lab manager at the Sims clinic in Dublin agrees that for heterosexual couples, sperm donors tend to be matched to the male’s characteristics. He is not surprised by the redhead ban, noting that while Ireland may be one of the top-demanding countries for red-haired donors, in absolute terms the levels of requests here are still fairly low.
“If it’s a heterosexual couple, we match mainly to the male characteristics, and the only time we would be really matching red hair is if the male [partner] has red hair,” says Coull.
“And it’s rare that we would get single women or same-sex partners requesting red hair.” The clinic orders donated sperm through Cryos for use in various fertility procedures, including intra-uterine insemination and in vitro fertilisation.
Patients fill out a sheet detailing preferred characteristics, and Coull finds an appropriate sperm donor. “When it is a heterosexual couple, the most common characteristics in Ireland that we are asked to match are dark hair and blue eyes,” he says.
Article: 20th September 2011 www.irishtimes.com
Lesbian, single, infertile? Looking for a sperm donor? or willing to donate sperm by personal arrangement? visit www.prideangel.com
Monday 19 September 2011
What if IVF treatment fails: three peoples stories
Eleni Kyriacou talks to three couples about how IVF and fertility treatment can turn lives upside down
Carole Waters, who has now adopted
Carole, 43, lives in Hampshire with her husband Andy, 43. They have had one IVF cycle and one frozen embryo transfer (FET). They have a daughter, Bea, five.
I was 29 when we first started trying to conceive and we waited five years before having IVF. I was against it for a long time – I didn't like the thought of all those drugs. I was determined to get pregnant naturally and all the tests had shown that we were both highly fertile, so there was no clinical reason why we shouldn't be able to conceive naturally.
Eventually we got sucked into it. I was told that I had the egg reserves of a woman in her 20s, so we were very hopeful. In our area there was no NHS funding, so we paid for it. A woman in the next town had three IVF cycles, all paid for. I hated injecting myself and the mood swings that came with it. I remember the moment I saw the blood and realised it had failed. I screamed and at that point I couldn't have got any lower. It took me six months to deal with it. I became paranoid and felt depressed. For those six months, Andy and I became very insular, almost attached at the hip. We felt only we could understand each other, so we hardly socialised. And, frankly, I was getting fed up of all the platitudes, people saying: "It'll happen, just relax."
IVF made me feel such a failure. Friends were having their third baby and we were still trying for our first. A year later, we had FET – using the frozen embryos left over from the IVF cycle. But that failed too. I had a gut feeling that I would never get pregnant, so we decided to stop. The doctors kept saying there was nothing wrong with us, so we couldn't see what IVF could do for us that we couldn't do ourselves. We had already spent £4,000 and continuing would have felt like throwing money away.
So we agreed that we wouldn't have children. It was heartbreaking, though deep down I don't think I really believed that. Eventually we started socialising again and we'd walk into parties, heads held high, and pretend everything was OK and that we were quite happy the way we were.
We had briefly talked about adoption but dismissed it, as we had read that you couldn't adopt a baby if you were over 35. We wanted a baby, not a toddler; it was a basic need in me and we wanted to be as much of an influence in the child's life as possible. About a year later, by chance, I bumped into a colleague in the car park at work. She was adopting two siblings. She told me that there weren't the age limits on adopters we had assumed. I had also heard that the process was harrowing, but she said, "It's nowhere near as bad as IVF." That resonated.
Andy and I agreed that, though we were happy now, we'd be full of regret when we were older. In 10 years, we might be holidaying in the Maldives but what would it mean without a family? And what about when we were older? We regularly socialise with our parents and my Mum and I are very close. We wanted that for us in the future. We decided to explore adoption and it took two years, from that first phone call to having Bea come to live with us. She was nine months old.
I had to give up on the idea of having my own genetic child and there was a certain amount of mourning involved. The notion left my head but it was still in my heart. I can pinpoint the day when the idea finally left me for good. It was the day we were approved for adoption. Before that, I was still thinking, maybe I will still get pregnant, as everyone says it will happen when you least expect it. Since then I haven't cared about getting pregnant and now I wouldn't want a birth child, because Bea might feel left out. I don't want that complication for her. If someone said I could go back 10 years and get pregnant, I categorically wouldn't do it.
I feel so proud of our daughter and what we've done. Anyone can have a baby, but not everyone can adopt. There's no doubt in our minds that we weren't meant to have a biological child, because she was already there waiting for us. It's one of the best things we ever did. I know women on their seventh and eight IVF cycles. It's heartbreaking. I wish they would consider adoption as another way to achieve a family, rather than as a second best.
For more information on adoption, visit www.baaf.org.uk
To read more go to http://bit.ly/pZssDB
Carole Waters, who has now adopted
Carole, 43, lives in Hampshire with her husband Andy, 43. They have had one IVF cycle and one frozen embryo transfer (FET). They have a daughter, Bea, five.
I was 29 when we first started trying to conceive and we waited five years before having IVF. I was against it for a long time – I didn't like the thought of all those drugs. I was determined to get pregnant naturally and all the tests had shown that we were both highly fertile, so there was no clinical reason why we shouldn't be able to conceive naturally.
Eventually we got sucked into it. I was told that I had the egg reserves of a woman in her 20s, so we were very hopeful. In our area there was no NHS funding, so we paid for it. A woman in the next town had three IVF cycles, all paid for. I hated injecting myself and the mood swings that came with it. I remember the moment I saw the blood and realised it had failed. I screamed and at that point I couldn't have got any lower. It took me six months to deal with it. I became paranoid and felt depressed. For those six months, Andy and I became very insular, almost attached at the hip. We felt only we could understand each other, so we hardly socialised. And, frankly, I was getting fed up of all the platitudes, people saying: "It'll happen, just relax."
IVF made me feel such a failure. Friends were having their third baby and we were still trying for our first. A year later, we had FET – using the frozen embryos left over from the IVF cycle. But that failed too. I had a gut feeling that I would never get pregnant, so we decided to stop. The doctors kept saying there was nothing wrong with us, so we couldn't see what IVF could do for us that we couldn't do ourselves. We had already spent £4,000 and continuing would have felt like throwing money away.
So we agreed that we wouldn't have children. It was heartbreaking, though deep down I don't think I really believed that. Eventually we started socialising again and we'd walk into parties, heads held high, and pretend everything was OK and that we were quite happy the way we were.
We had briefly talked about adoption but dismissed it, as we had read that you couldn't adopt a baby if you were over 35. We wanted a baby, not a toddler; it was a basic need in me and we wanted to be as much of an influence in the child's life as possible. About a year later, by chance, I bumped into a colleague in the car park at work. She was adopting two siblings. She told me that there weren't the age limits on adopters we had assumed. I had also heard that the process was harrowing, but she said, "It's nowhere near as bad as IVF." That resonated.
Andy and I agreed that, though we were happy now, we'd be full of regret when we were older. In 10 years, we might be holidaying in the Maldives but what would it mean without a family? And what about when we were older? We regularly socialise with our parents and my Mum and I are very close. We wanted that for us in the future. We decided to explore adoption and it took two years, from that first phone call to having Bea come to live with us. She was nine months old.
I had to give up on the idea of having my own genetic child and there was a certain amount of mourning involved. The notion left my head but it was still in my heart. I can pinpoint the day when the idea finally left me for good. It was the day we were approved for adoption. Before that, I was still thinking, maybe I will still get pregnant, as everyone says it will happen when you least expect it. Since then I haven't cared about getting pregnant and now I wouldn't want a birth child, because Bea might feel left out. I don't want that complication for her. If someone said I could go back 10 years and get pregnant, I categorically wouldn't do it.
I feel so proud of our daughter and what we've done. Anyone can have a baby, but not everyone can adopt. There's no doubt in our minds that we weren't meant to have a biological child, because she was already there waiting for us. It's one of the best things we ever did. I know women on their seventh and eight IVF cycles. It's heartbreaking. I wish they would consider adoption as another way to achieve a family, rather than as a second best.
For more information on adoption, visit www.baaf.org.uk
To read more go to http://bit.ly/pZssDB
Friday 16 September 2011
Alternative Families Show - London 2011
SATURDAY 17TH SEPTEMBER 10 am - 5 pm
Demystifying the process of starting a family
GRAND CONNAUGHT ROOMS, COVENT GARDEN, LONDON
SEMINAR BOOKINGS NOW OPEN EACH SEMINAR BOOKED COSTS £3
• Thinking of becoming a parent?
• Want to understand the options available to you?
• Are you considering IVF, adoption or surrogacy?
• Want to understand your rights as a parent?
• Need help deciding on known or anonymous donors?
• Want to find support networks for same-sex parents?
A one-stop shop for anyone wanting to become a parent. The Alternative Families Show brings together all the information you need to make informed choices on parenthood. For the the lesbian and gay community, this is your opportunity to get some real facts surrounding same-sex parenting, co-parenting, surrogacy and much more.
Exhibitors 2011 include the following:
The lesbian, gay and bisexual charity. Stonewall played a key role in lobbying for important legislative changes for gay and lesbian parents.
www.stonewall.org.uk
Pride Angel is a leading worldwide connection site, fertility forum and blog for lesbian, gay, single and infertile couples, wishing to become parents through co-parenting and donor conception.
www.prideangel.com
British Association for Adoption and Fostering. Family finding, publications, training, conferences, consultancy, campaigning and advice.
www.baaf.org.uk
Over just the past 8 years, the BSC have matched over 35 couples and singles with surrogates, both traditional and gestational, and with egg donors, producing 45 babies! All of these couples have been matched with surrogates in the USA. Now with recent law changes in the UK and the positive encouragement from the UK community as a whole, we bring you The British Surrogacy Centre, dedicated to building families of the future and giving ordinary people the chance to have a family of their own.
www.britishsurrogacycentre.com
European Sperm Bank provides patients with donor choices. They select donors very carefully and use industry-leading donor screening procedures strictly in line with EU regulations.
www.europeanspermbank.com
L Group Families supports lesbians by providing specialist information and advice on the different services within the marketplace in order that they can make informed choices on the best treatment and options available to them and enjoy the prospect of parenthood. Our aims are:To provide support, information and advice to lesbians who are thinking about starting a family, (now or in the future); and to provide a support service to lesbian parents, carers and their children.
www.lgroupfamilies.org.uk
The North London Adoption Consortium (NLAC) is a partnership of five local authority adoption agencies (Barnet, Camden, Enfield, Haringey and Islington) and the voluntary agency Norwood. We all work together to provide the very best possible service for children waiting to be adopted and for those wanting to adopt. Working in partnership means we are able to offer a greater range of choice for children and adopters. By sharing information about waiting children and approved adopters, we are able to find new homes for children in a more efficient and timely manner.
www.adoptionnorthlondon.co.uk
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority
Dedicated to licensing and monitoring UK fertility clinics and providing impartial and authoritative information to people considering or going through treatment or donating.
www.hfea.gov.uk
Kites Children’s Services has been established since 1995 to provide quality services for young people who present with sexual development problems which may lead to sexually harmful behaviour. Kites has a multidisciplinary team providing residential, fostering, education and aftercare placements all supported by therapeutic services and external consultants.
www.kitescs.com
New Family Social is the UK wide support network for LGBT adopters, foster carers and their children. We have over 450 families and families to be who share advice and encouragement online, and can find others near them in order to build their local support networks. Most importantly, our regular family events around the UK give our children the confidence of knowing other families like theirs.
www.newfamilysocial.co.uk
and many more exhibitors....
Seminars run throughout the day on subjects from conception, adoption, legal rights, & support networks. The show will give you access to information from top UK advisors in their field.
Seminars wil include talks by leading experts within their field such as:
Family ties and the law: Singles, gays and lesbians
by fertility and parenting lawyer: Natalie Gamble
www.nataliegambleassociates.com
Surrogacy and IVF for same sex couples and singles
by Dr Susan Treiser, IVF New Jersey and Barrie & Tony Drewitt-Barlow
www.britishsurrogacycentre.com
Demystifying the process of starting a family
GRAND CONNAUGHT ROOMS, COVENT GARDEN, LONDON
SEMINAR BOOKINGS NOW OPEN EACH SEMINAR BOOKED COSTS £3
• Thinking of becoming a parent?
• Want to understand the options available to you?
• Are you considering IVF, adoption or surrogacy?
• Want to understand your rights as a parent?
• Need help deciding on known or anonymous donors?
• Want to find support networks for same-sex parents?
A one-stop shop for anyone wanting to become a parent. The Alternative Families Show brings together all the information you need to make informed choices on parenthood. For the the lesbian and gay community, this is your opportunity to get some real facts surrounding same-sex parenting, co-parenting, surrogacy and much more.
Exhibitors 2011 include the following:
The lesbian, gay and bisexual charity. Stonewall played a key role in lobbying for important legislative changes for gay and lesbian parents.
www.stonewall.org.uk
Pride Angel is a leading worldwide connection site, fertility forum and blog for lesbian, gay, single and infertile couples, wishing to become parents through co-parenting and donor conception.
www.prideangel.com
British Association for Adoption and Fostering. Family finding, publications, training, conferences, consultancy, campaigning and advice.
www.baaf.org.uk
Over just the past 8 years, the BSC have matched over 35 couples and singles with surrogates, both traditional and gestational, and with egg donors, producing 45 babies! All of these couples have been matched with surrogates in the USA. Now with recent law changes in the UK and the positive encouragement from the UK community as a whole, we bring you The British Surrogacy Centre, dedicated to building families of the future and giving ordinary people the chance to have a family of their own.
www.britishsurrogacycentre.com
European Sperm Bank provides patients with donor choices. They select donors very carefully and use industry-leading donor screening procedures strictly in line with EU regulations.
www.europeanspermbank.com
L Group Families supports lesbians by providing specialist information and advice on the different services within the marketplace in order that they can make informed choices on the best treatment and options available to them and enjoy the prospect of parenthood. Our aims are:To provide support, information and advice to lesbians who are thinking about starting a family, (now or in the future); and to provide a support service to lesbian parents, carers and their children.
www.lgroupfamilies.org.uk
The North London Adoption Consortium (NLAC) is a partnership of five local authority adoption agencies (Barnet, Camden, Enfield, Haringey and Islington) and the voluntary agency Norwood. We all work together to provide the very best possible service for children waiting to be adopted and for those wanting to adopt. Working in partnership means we are able to offer a greater range of choice for children and adopters. By sharing information about waiting children and approved adopters, we are able to find new homes for children in a more efficient and timely manner.
www.adoptionnorthlondon.co.uk
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority
Dedicated to licensing and monitoring UK fertility clinics and providing impartial and authoritative information to people considering or going through treatment or donating.
www.hfea.gov.uk
Kites Children’s Services has been established since 1995 to provide quality services for young people who present with sexual development problems which may lead to sexually harmful behaviour. Kites has a multidisciplinary team providing residential, fostering, education and aftercare placements all supported by therapeutic services and external consultants.
www.kitescs.com
New Family Social is the UK wide support network for LGBT adopters, foster carers and their children. We have over 450 families and families to be who share advice and encouragement online, and can find others near them in order to build their local support networks. Most importantly, our regular family events around the UK give our children the confidence of knowing other families like theirs.
www.newfamilysocial.co.uk
and many more exhibitors....
Seminars run throughout the day on subjects from conception, adoption, legal rights, & support networks. The show will give you access to information from top UK advisors in their field.
Seminars wil include talks by leading experts within their field such as:
Family ties and the law: Singles, gays and lesbians
by fertility and parenting lawyer: Natalie Gamble
www.nataliegambleassociates.com
Surrogacy and IVF for same sex couples and singles
by Dr Susan Treiser, IVF New Jersey and Barrie & Tony Drewitt-Barlow
www.britishsurrogacycentre.com
Wednesday 14 September 2011
Can you trust your surrogacy lawyer?
Theresa Erickson, a high profile Californian attorney specialising in assisted reproduction law (self-styled online and in the media as ‘the surrogacy lawyer’) pleaded guilty last month to charges relating to her involvement in a baby selling scam. The case has sent shock waves through the US assisted reproduction law community, which is reeling at the disgrace of one of its best known members.
But although the story is shocking, I would hate to think that wider conclusions might be drawn about the way in which commercial surrogacy is practiced (legally) in many US states, or that US surrogacy lawyers in general should not be trusted. As well as being a story about the wrongs, this is a story of ethical boundaries being enforced, and a story of reputable US surrogacy attorneys who ensured that an unethical and illegal scheme was exposed and stopped.
How did the scheme work?
According to news reports and information posted online from those involved, Ms Erickson, working with another lawyer, Ms Neiman, and a third woman, Ms Chambers, recruited ‘surrogate mothers’ in the USA and arranged for them to travel to the Ukraine where embryos were transferred which had been created with donated eggs and sperm. The birth mothers were assured that this was perfectly legal and was ‘just another way of doing surrogacy’, and that there was a long list of intended parents waiting for their help.
Once the birth mothers were three months’ pregnant then – and only then – would the conspirators advertise for prospective intended parents. The couples who approached them were told, falsely, that intended parents had backed out of a planned surrogacy and that, for a substantial fee, they could step in. Ms Erickson then filed fraudulent papers with the Californian court to enable the parents to be named on the birth certificate. The scheme was said to have been carried out on at least twelve occasions.
What happened to expose the scam?
One of the birth mothers involved, suspecting something was amiss, approached another US assisted reproduction attorney for advice about whether this really was legitimate surrogacy practice. The attorney was concerned and contacted the chair of the American Bar Association’s Assisted Reproductive Technology Committee. He approached Ms Erickson to ask her about the scheme (she denied any involvement) and then, with the support of a colleague based in California where Ms Erickson was based, followed his professional duty to report dishonest or criminal conduct, and referred the case to the FBI. Following an investigation, Ms Erickson was charged and pleaded guilty. She is currently awaiting sentencing and faces up to five years in prison.
(I should add that the intended parents involved, all of whom were exonerated of any wrongdoing, have since been legally confirmed as the parents of the children they have, in effect, adopted).
Why was the scheme wrong?
This baby-making scam was so deeply and fundamentally wrong that it is difficult to know where to start. What shocks me the most, I suppose, was the flagrant disregard for all those involved – for the birth mothers who became pregnant on the basis of a lie (and the abuse of trust, relying on the reputation of a well-known lawyer, which that involved), for the intended parents whose desperation was exploited so greedily, and most of all for the preciousness of the lives of the children conceived, not within a loving family, but by design and for profit.
This was not, on anyone’s definition, really surrogacy. Under UK law, surrogacy involves artificial conception with the gametes of one or both of the intended parents (which quite obviously has to involve the intended parents from the outset). The rules are different in California, but surrogacy still has to involve an arrangement between specific individuals made before conception. Baby selling or adoption for profit is therefore probably a more accurate categorisation, although of course Ms Erickson was a well known surrogacy lawyer and so those involved were able to ‘sell’ the scam as surrogacy.
Interestingly, Ms Erickson was ultimately convicted, not of baby selling or any offences directly related to assisted reproduction, but of wire transfer fraud. Given the context, this has the resonance of Al Capone being convicted for tax evasion. However, I suppose it is appropriate that Ms Erickson has been held to account for deception (the scheme had, as I understand it, involved lies to the surrogates, the intended parents and even the Californian court). If the rules are anything like they are in the UK, whether or not she goes to prison, Ms Erickson will never be able to practice law again.
To read more go to http://bit.ly/ri0LQO
But although the story is shocking, I would hate to think that wider conclusions might be drawn about the way in which commercial surrogacy is practiced (legally) in many US states, or that US surrogacy lawyers in general should not be trusted. As well as being a story about the wrongs, this is a story of ethical boundaries being enforced, and a story of reputable US surrogacy attorneys who ensured that an unethical and illegal scheme was exposed and stopped.
How did the scheme work?
According to news reports and information posted online from those involved, Ms Erickson, working with another lawyer, Ms Neiman, and a third woman, Ms Chambers, recruited ‘surrogate mothers’ in the USA and arranged for them to travel to the Ukraine where embryos were transferred which had been created with donated eggs and sperm. The birth mothers were assured that this was perfectly legal and was ‘just another way of doing surrogacy’, and that there was a long list of intended parents waiting for their help.
Once the birth mothers were three months’ pregnant then – and only then – would the conspirators advertise for prospective intended parents. The couples who approached them were told, falsely, that intended parents had backed out of a planned surrogacy and that, for a substantial fee, they could step in. Ms Erickson then filed fraudulent papers with the Californian court to enable the parents to be named on the birth certificate. The scheme was said to have been carried out on at least twelve occasions.
What happened to expose the scam?
One of the birth mothers involved, suspecting something was amiss, approached another US assisted reproduction attorney for advice about whether this really was legitimate surrogacy practice. The attorney was concerned and contacted the chair of the American Bar Association’s Assisted Reproductive Technology Committee. He approached Ms Erickson to ask her about the scheme (she denied any involvement) and then, with the support of a colleague based in California where Ms Erickson was based, followed his professional duty to report dishonest or criminal conduct, and referred the case to the FBI. Following an investigation, Ms Erickson was charged and pleaded guilty. She is currently awaiting sentencing and faces up to five years in prison.
(I should add that the intended parents involved, all of whom were exonerated of any wrongdoing, have since been legally confirmed as the parents of the children they have, in effect, adopted).
Why was the scheme wrong?
This baby-making scam was so deeply and fundamentally wrong that it is difficult to know where to start. What shocks me the most, I suppose, was the flagrant disregard for all those involved – for the birth mothers who became pregnant on the basis of a lie (and the abuse of trust, relying on the reputation of a well-known lawyer, which that involved), for the intended parents whose desperation was exploited so greedily, and most of all for the preciousness of the lives of the children conceived, not within a loving family, but by design and for profit.
This was not, on anyone’s definition, really surrogacy. Under UK law, surrogacy involves artificial conception with the gametes of one or both of the intended parents (which quite obviously has to involve the intended parents from the outset). The rules are different in California, but surrogacy still has to involve an arrangement between specific individuals made before conception. Baby selling or adoption for profit is therefore probably a more accurate categorisation, although of course Ms Erickson was a well known surrogacy lawyer and so those involved were able to ‘sell’ the scam as surrogacy.
Interestingly, Ms Erickson was ultimately convicted, not of baby selling or any offences directly related to assisted reproduction, but of wire transfer fraud. Given the context, this has the resonance of Al Capone being convicted for tax evasion. However, I suppose it is appropriate that Ms Erickson has been held to account for deception (the scheme had, as I understand it, involved lies to the surrogates, the intended parents and even the Californian court). If the rules are anything like they are in the UK, whether or not she goes to prison, Ms Erickson will never be able to practice law again.
To read more go to http://bit.ly/ri0LQO
Monday 12 September 2011
Pride Angel would like to hear about your fertility and parenting experiences
Pride Angel wants your feedback - Receive £150 mothercare vouchers for FREE
Having babies and toddlers can be expensive as they just keep on growing. Imagine what you could buy with £150 Mothercare vouchers, a endless supply of nappies, new baby clothes, a new pushchair, whatever you would buy, the choice is entirely yours!
How to get your free vouchers? Pride Angel would love to hear about your experiences, whether you have:
• Found a donor through Pride Angel?
• Got pregnant using a Pride Angel insemination kit?
• Starting the journey to parenthood and considering different options?
• Co-parenting with a single person or gay couple?
• Used a friend as a sperm donor?
• Using IVF treatment or going through surrogacy?
Are you willing to write a small blog/article about your personal experiences in the region of 200-500 words? Personal names do not need to be included if you prefer not to.
The best article will be published on Pride Angel and will be rewarded with £150 mothercare vouchers. Any other articles which we may choose to add to Pride Angel will be rewarded £50 in mothercare vouchers.
Speak to us for more information, just contact us. Enter your article by email: info@prideangel.com
This promotion is available until 30th November 2011. All entries will be replied to by the Pride Angel team.
Having babies and toddlers can be expensive as they just keep on growing. Imagine what you could buy with £150 Mothercare vouchers, a endless supply of nappies, new baby clothes, a new pushchair, whatever you would buy, the choice is entirely yours!
How to get your free vouchers? Pride Angel would love to hear about your experiences, whether you have:
• Found a donor through Pride Angel?
• Got pregnant using a Pride Angel insemination kit?
• Starting the journey to parenthood and considering different options?
• Co-parenting with a single person or gay couple?
• Used a friend as a sperm donor?
• Using IVF treatment or going through surrogacy?
Are you willing to write a small blog/article about your personal experiences in the region of 200-500 words? Personal names do not need to be included if you prefer not to.
The best article will be published on Pride Angel and will be rewarded with £150 mothercare vouchers. Any other articles which we may choose to add to Pride Angel will be rewarded £50 in mothercare vouchers.
Speak to us for more information, just contact us. Enter your article by email: info@prideangel.com
This promotion is available until 30th November 2011. All entries will be replied to by the Pride Angel team.
Sunday 11 September 2011
Surrogate mother abandoned with twins by intended couple
Cathleen Hachey’s first try as a surrogate mother took a heartbreaking turn when she was abandoned via text message last spring, 27 weeks into the pregnancy she’d initiated to help another couple start a family.
The young New Brunswick stay-at-home mom was carrying twins for a British couple. But three months before Hachey’s due date, the couple declared their marriage had ended and they would not be coming for the babies.
Hachey, 20, who was already the mother of a 1- and 2-year-old, delivered the twins — a boy and a girl — on June 28. She was able to find the twins an adoptive home, but experts in the field say the episode is a lesson on the need for better safeguards for both surrogate mothers and the intended parents.
Without a lawyer or a fertility doctor to advise her, Hachey was left vulnerable and outside Canada’s fertility laws. “Here’s a lovely, trusting young woman who should have taken care of herself,” says Sherry Levitan, a Toronto-based fertility lawyer. “The law is there for a reason.”
Hachey, who lives in Bathurst, N.B., tried to do what experts say all surrogate mothers should do before she agreed to carry a child for the couple in Hertfordshire, England, whom she met through the website Surrogate Mothers Online.
She spent about six months getting to know them, speaking with them daily by phone. She met the pair when they flew to New Brunswick in November. The three signed a surrogacy contract prepared by the couple that declared them the child’s legal parents and granted Hachey $200 per month for expenses related to her pregnancy.
The trio decided Hachey would be a “traditional” surrogate: she would use her own egg and the husband’s sperm to conceive the child because the wife suffered from polycystic ovarian syndrome and was unable to conceive or carry a baby.
Surrogacy advocates frown upon this approach, and few fertility clinics will agree to inseminate women who choose it. So Hachey performed an “at home” insemination using a medical syringe and semen from a cup.
“Traditional surrogacy is too fraught with issues,” says Toronto fertility lawyer Nancy Lam. The child is genetically connected to the surrogate, unlike in a much more common “gestational” surrogacy, in which the surrogate mother carries a baby conceived with a donated egg and has no genetic connection to the child she delivers.
The traditional surrogacy complicated Hachey’s situation, leaving her even more vulnerable when the couple backed out 27 weeks into her pregnancy. The intended mother sent Hachey a text message stating the couple had separated and she wouldn’t be taking the unborn boy and girl because she felt that as a single mother she couldn’t care for twins.
“It said she mentally couldn’t handle herself right now,” Hachey recalls, “so she didn’t think she can handle two other human beings.” The expectant mother was stunned: “They were my biological children so they were my biological problem.”
With the help of a friend, Hachey did find a Nova Scotia couple who had been waiting several years to adopt and were overjoyed to take the twins. “It was hard,” she says. “If I was in a better position, I would have kept them.”
But she had to care for her two children alone because her fiancé left 18 weeks into her surrogate pregnancy. Faced with the prospect of sole breadwinner for a family of four, he said he couldn’t cope with the financial stress. They have since reunited.
The Star was not able to reach the intended parents in England.
To read more go to http://bit.ly/oZs986
The young New Brunswick stay-at-home mom was carrying twins for a British couple. But three months before Hachey’s due date, the couple declared their marriage had ended and they would not be coming for the babies.
Hachey, 20, who was already the mother of a 1- and 2-year-old, delivered the twins — a boy and a girl — on June 28. She was able to find the twins an adoptive home, but experts in the field say the episode is a lesson on the need for better safeguards for both surrogate mothers and the intended parents.
Without a lawyer or a fertility doctor to advise her, Hachey was left vulnerable and outside Canada’s fertility laws. “Here’s a lovely, trusting young woman who should have taken care of herself,” says Sherry Levitan, a Toronto-based fertility lawyer. “The law is there for a reason.”
Hachey, who lives in Bathurst, N.B., tried to do what experts say all surrogate mothers should do before she agreed to carry a child for the couple in Hertfordshire, England, whom she met through the website Surrogate Mothers Online.
She spent about six months getting to know them, speaking with them daily by phone. She met the pair when they flew to New Brunswick in November. The three signed a surrogacy contract prepared by the couple that declared them the child’s legal parents and granted Hachey $200 per month for expenses related to her pregnancy.
The trio decided Hachey would be a “traditional” surrogate: she would use her own egg and the husband’s sperm to conceive the child because the wife suffered from polycystic ovarian syndrome and was unable to conceive or carry a baby.
Surrogacy advocates frown upon this approach, and few fertility clinics will agree to inseminate women who choose it. So Hachey performed an “at home” insemination using a medical syringe and semen from a cup.
“Traditional surrogacy is too fraught with issues,” says Toronto fertility lawyer Nancy Lam. The child is genetically connected to the surrogate, unlike in a much more common “gestational” surrogacy, in which the surrogate mother carries a baby conceived with a donated egg and has no genetic connection to the child she delivers.
The traditional surrogacy complicated Hachey’s situation, leaving her even more vulnerable when the couple backed out 27 weeks into her pregnancy. The intended mother sent Hachey a text message stating the couple had separated and she wouldn’t be taking the unborn boy and girl because she felt that as a single mother she couldn’t care for twins.
“It said she mentally couldn’t handle herself right now,” Hachey recalls, “so she didn’t think she can handle two other human beings.” The expectant mother was stunned: “They were my biological children so they were my biological problem.”
With the help of a friend, Hachey did find a Nova Scotia couple who had been waiting several years to adopt and were overjoyed to take the twins. “It was hard,” she says. “If I was in a better position, I would have kept them.”
But she had to care for her two children alone because her fiancé left 18 weeks into her surrogate pregnancy. Faced with the prospect of sole breadwinner for a family of four, he said he couldn’t cope with the financial stress. They have since reunited.
The Star was not able to reach the intended parents in England.
To read more go to http://bit.ly/oZs986
Friday 9 September 2011
Should number of pregnancies per sperm donor in Canada and US be restricted?
With one Toronto man estimating he has up to 1,000 half-siblings, some fertility-treatment experts are calling on Canada to legally restrict how many children can be born from a single donor’s semen.
The growing families of donor offspring could cause unusual spread of genetic malformations, raise the risk of inadvertent incest between biological brothers and sisters and prove emotionally taxing to the children, critics say.
Although medical groups and others already recommend restrictions in the number of pregnancies per donor, legislation is needed to ensure sperm banks and their suppliers follow the proper limits, said Juliet Guichon, a bio-ethics professor at the Unviersity of Calgary.
“It [self regulation] is not working,” said Prof. Guichon. “There’s no incentive. It’s the market economy: why would you limit business?” Various reports on the infertility industry, including the 1993 federal Royal commission on new reproductive technology and an earlier B.C. commission, have actually been recommending limits of as few as six pregnancies per donor for the last 30 years, she said.
Britain, some Australian states, New Zealand, the Netherlands and a handful of other European countries already have laws that restrict the number of children per donor, Prof. Guichon noted.
The issue came to the fore again this week, however, with reports from the U.S. — which has no legislated limits — that one donor there has 150 offspring. The genetic siblings have been catalogued on an unofficial but widely used American web site — the Donor Sibling Registry — that brings together such relatives, sometimes based on the number assigned to the donor by his sperm bank.
The Colorado-based registry’s director says another group of 75 offspring includes several Canadians. About 95% of sperm used in artificial insemination and in-vitro fertilization treatments here actually comes from the States.
Barry Stevens, a Toronto filmmaker, said he was born in the U.K. in 1952 with sperm from a donor who supplied his semen over about three decades, and probably produced 500 to 1,000 children, now spread through Britian, Canada and other countries.
“There should be limits, because if some offspring want to find their relatives, and want to meet their donor … it’s kind of daunting when it’s in the hundreds,” he said. “For some, it becomes kind of creepy and freaky.”
The fertility industry has restricted its practices considerably since the start of artificial-insemination around the middle of the last century, but critics say the lack of regulation or monitoring of what happens to donor sperm means the real-life practice is still largely unknown.
At ReproMed, which runs Canada’s only sperm bank, administrators do impose restrictions, said Dr. Alfonso Del Vaille, its director. Donors are limited to three live births per 100,000 population in a given geographic area, though that could mean as many as 75 offspring in a city the size of Toronto.
Dr. Del Vaille said he would support legislated limits, so long as they are based on good science. The chief concern stemming from large donor families is the risk that half-siblings unknowingly enter sexual relationships, upping the risk of birth defects in any resulting children.
To read more go to http://bit.ly/qtVWn7
The growing families of donor offspring could cause unusual spread of genetic malformations, raise the risk of inadvertent incest between biological brothers and sisters and prove emotionally taxing to the children, critics say.
Although medical groups and others already recommend restrictions in the number of pregnancies per donor, legislation is needed to ensure sperm banks and their suppliers follow the proper limits, said Juliet Guichon, a bio-ethics professor at the Unviersity of Calgary.
“It [self regulation] is not working,” said Prof. Guichon. “There’s no incentive. It’s the market economy: why would you limit business?” Various reports on the infertility industry, including the 1993 federal Royal commission on new reproductive technology and an earlier B.C. commission, have actually been recommending limits of as few as six pregnancies per donor for the last 30 years, she said.
Britain, some Australian states, New Zealand, the Netherlands and a handful of other European countries already have laws that restrict the number of children per donor, Prof. Guichon noted.
The issue came to the fore again this week, however, with reports from the U.S. — which has no legislated limits — that one donor there has 150 offspring. The genetic siblings have been catalogued on an unofficial but widely used American web site — the Donor Sibling Registry — that brings together such relatives, sometimes based on the number assigned to the donor by his sperm bank.
The Colorado-based registry’s director says another group of 75 offspring includes several Canadians. About 95% of sperm used in artificial insemination and in-vitro fertilization treatments here actually comes from the States.
Barry Stevens, a Toronto filmmaker, said he was born in the U.K. in 1952 with sperm from a donor who supplied his semen over about three decades, and probably produced 500 to 1,000 children, now spread through Britian, Canada and other countries.
“There should be limits, because if some offspring want to find their relatives, and want to meet their donor … it’s kind of daunting when it’s in the hundreds,” he said. “For some, it becomes kind of creepy and freaky.”
The fertility industry has restricted its practices considerably since the start of artificial-insemination around the middle of the last century, but critics say the lack of regulation or monitoring of what happens to donor sperm means the real-life practice is still largely unknown.
At ReproMed, which runs Canada’s only sperm bank, administrators do impose restrictions, said Dr. Alfonso Del Vaille, its director. Donors are limited to three live births per 100,000 population in a given geographic area, though that could mean as many as 75 offspring in a city the size of Toronto.
Dr. Del Vaille said he would support legislated limits, so long as they are based on good science. The chief concern stemming from large donor families is the risk that half-siblings unknowingly enter sexual relationships, upping the risk of birth defects in any resulting children.
To read more go to http://bit.ly/qtVWn7
Tuesday 6 September 2011
Single sperm donor in the US gave rise to 150 children
A 48-year old woman who gave birth to a son through artificial insemination was shocked to learn that he has 149 siblings, with more on the way, the New York Times reported.
Cynthia Daily used a Web-based search to connect with other families who had used her sperm donor, with the thought her son might be able to connect with a few siblings one day. But she could not have imagined the extended family would amount to the size of a typical high school graduating class in the U.S.
Daily's son is not alone - more and more parents who conceived using a sperm donor are learning their children have dozens upon dozens of siblings. The sheer volume of offspring from a single sperm sample, coupled with the high likelihood that the offspring will be close in age and live in close proximity to one another, is raising concerns about the possibility that some of these children -- many who are reaching adulthood -- may unknowingly become romantically involved with a half-sibling.
The threat of accidental incest sounds like a setup for a Farrelly Brothers comedy, but for children born of active donors, the possibility poses serious risks besides the eew factor.
Inbreeding - and for that matter, large numbers of children with the same parent - can spread genes responsible for rare diseases, potentially increasing the prevalence of those diseases. And children born of incest have a much higher rate of birth defects and health complications.
"My daughter knows her donor's [registry] number for this very reason," the mother of a teenager conceived via sperm donation in California told the Times. "She's been in school with numerous kids who were born through donors. She's had crushes on boys who are donor children. It's become part of sex education" for her.
Does the Father Abraham factor point to a need for more sperm donors? It's hard to say...the issue seems to be one of perceived quality, not quantity. In sperm, as in life, some specimens are simply more attractive than others.
According to the Times report, critics complain that clinics and sperm banks "are earning huge profits by allowing too many children to be conceived with sperm from popular donors." In some countries, there are limits imposed on how many offspring a single sperm donor can produce, but so far, no such restrictions exist in the U.S.
Because women who give birth through sperm donors are not required to report the child's information to sperm banks and fertility clinics - though some do voluntarily - the most reliable resource for families who conceived through a donor is Donorsiblingregistry.com, a resource created by Wendy Kramer and her son Ryan to provide children with information about their genetic origins. Here, parents and children can connect with unknown half-siblings by entering in their donor's registry number.
"They [parents] think their daughter may have a few siblings," Ms. Kramer told the Times, "but then they go on our site and find out their daughter actually has 18 brothers and sisters. They're freaked out. I'm amazed that these groups keep growing and growing."
Some donors complain that sperm banks willfully misled them into believing the number of children they might produce. One California-based donor, who wished to remain anonymous, told the Times that he discovered he had fathered dozens of children after his sperm bank promised him the number would be no more than give.
"It was all about whatever they could get away with," he said of the sperm bank. "It is unfair and reprehensible to the donor families, donors and donor children."
Cynthia Daily used a Web-based search to connect with other families who had used her sperm donor, with the thought her son might be able to connect with a few siblings one day. But she could not have imagined the extended family would amount to the size of a typical high school graduating class in the U.S.
Daily's son is not alone - more and more parents who conceived using a sperm donor are learning their children have dozens upon dozens of siblings. The sheer volume of offspring from a single sperm sample, coupled with the high likelihood that the offspring will be close in age and live in close proximity to one another, is raising concerns about the possibility that some of these children -- many who are reaching adulthood -- may unknowingly become romantically involved with a half-sibling.
The threat of accidental incest sounds like a setup for a Farrelly Brothers comedy, but for children born of active donors, the possibility poses serious risks besides the eew factor.
Inbreeding - and for that matter, large numbers of children with the same parent - can spread genes responsible for rare diseases, potentially increasing the prevalence of those diseases. And children born of incest have a much higher rate of birth defects and health complications.
"My daughter knows her donor's [registry] number for this very reason," the mother of a teenager conceived via sperm donation in California told the Times. "She's been in school with numerous kids who were born through donors. She's had crushes on boys who are donor children. It's become part of sex education" for her.
Does the Father Abraham factor point to a need for more sperm donors? It's hard to say...the issue seems to be one of perceived quality, not quantity. In sperm, as in life, some specimens are simply more attractive than others.
According to the Times report, critics complain that clinics and sperm banks "are earning huge profits by allowing too many children to be conceived with sperm from popular donors." In some countries, there are limits imposed on how many offspring a single sperm donor can produce, but so far, no such restrictions exist in the U.S.
Because women who give birth through sperm donors are not required to report the child's information to sperm banks and fertility clinics - though some do voluntarily - the most reliable resource for families who conceived through a donor is Donorsiblingregistry.com, a resource created by Wendy Kramer and her son Ryan to provide children with information about their genetic origins. Here, parents and children can connect with unknown half-siblings by entering in their donor's registry number.
"They [parents] think their daughter may have a few siblings," Ms. Kramer told the Times, "but then they go on our site and find out their daughter actually has 18 brothers and sisters. They're freaked out. I'm amazed that these groups keep growing and growing."
Some donors complain that sperm banks willfully misled them into believing the number of children they might produce. One California-based donor, who wished to remain anonymous, told the Times that he discovered he had fathered dozens of children after his sperm bank promised him the number would be no more than give.
"It was all about whatever they could get away with," he said of the sperm bank. "It is unfair and reprehensible to the donor families, donors and donor children."
Sunday 4 September 2011
Sperm donors desperately needed in Gold Coast Australia
DESPERATE couples and single women are being forced to import sperm from overseas to become parents because there are just eight registered donors on the Gold Coast.
The Gold Coast Bulletin can reveal the city's three fertility clinics Monash IVF, City Fertility and Queensland Fertility Group have only eight donors to cover a population of more than half a million.
Gold Coast fertility doctors believe changes to legislation have increased demand, but shortened supply. In 2005 laws changed allowing single women and same sex couples access to fertility treatments. The law also changed so that all Australian sperm donors were no longer able to remain anonymous.
Queensland Fertility Group Medical Director Dr Andrew Cary said about 400 of their patients statewide seek access to donor sperm each year, yet they only recruit about four donors a year.
''It's hard to retain donors as they are only allowed to create ten families, including their own and must now consent to having their identity released to any children who arise from the use of their sperm once the child reaches 18,'' he said.
''Due to this, less than 20 percent of potential donors who make initial inquires now go through to becoming registered donors.'' Gold Coast fertility clinics are interested in speaking with anyone who is considering donating sperm.
The Gold Coast Bulletin can reveal the city's three fertility clinics Monash IVF, City Fertility and Queensland Fertility Group have only eight donors to cover a population of more than half a million.
Gold Coast fertility doctors believe changes to legislation have increased demand, but shortened supply. In 2005 laws changed allowing single women and same sex couples access to fertility treatments. The law also changed so that all Australian sperm donors were no longer able to remain anonymous.
Queensland Fertility Group Medical Director Dr Andrew Cary said about 400 of their patients statewide seek access to donor sperm each year, yet they only recruit about four donors a year.
''It's hard to retain donors as they are only allowed to create ten families, including their own and must now consent to having their identity released to any children who arise from the use of their sperm once the child reaches 18,'' he said.
''Due to this, less than 20 percent of potential donors who make initial inquires now go through to becoming registered donors.'' Gold Coast fertility clinics are interested in speaking with anyone who is considering donating sperm.
Thursday 1 September 2011
The incrediable meeting between an egg donor and the twins she helped conceive 20 years ago
egg donor who waited 19 years to see the twins she helped create has spoken of her joy at finally meeting them. And the woman who relied on the donated eggs to have children says 'she gave me my life back'. Sylvia Barr had a son from a sperm donor, and decided to donate her eggs in order to give someone else the same joy.
But when she read in the Daily Mail about Joan Isherwood, whose twins were born by an anonymous egg donation, Mrs Barr realised that she was the biological mother. And last night a BBC documentary showed the first meeting between Mrs Barr, Mrs Isherwood and their children.
The extraordinary story will contribute to the debate over the right of children born from donors to know the identity of their biological parents, a right enshrined in law since 2005.
Mrs Barr discovered that twins Katherine and Jonathan were her biological children after reading about Mrs Isherwood, and seeing her on TV discussing the death of her sons David, four, and Andrew, nine, killed in a terrible car crash which left her unable to conceive.
But she waited until the twins turned 18 before trying to contact them. Happily, they and their mother jumped at the chance to meet Mrs Barr 'I was very nervous, I didn't know what to expect,' she told the Daily Telegraph. 'There is no etiquette or protocol for such a thing but Joan came straight towards me and gave me a hug.
'It was surreal: I was looking into the eyes of my genetic children.' Mrs Barr made the decision to donate her eggs soon after the birth of son Eliott, now 20. She says that it was a struggle not to contact Katherine and Jonathan after she had discovered their identity.
'If I had lived nearer I would probably have gone and sat at the end of their road just to see them,' she said. Mrs Isherwood, of Warrington in Cheshire, said that the new family link was unexpected but welcome. 'We were told it was a totally anonymous decision and as far as I was concerned that was the end of it,' she told BBC Breakfast.
'But I often used to wonder because not only did Sylvia help to create the twins but she actually gave me my life back because I felt as though my life had been destroyed.' She added: 'I was so grateful to be given the chance to create a second family that had I met Sylvia on the day she donated the eggs I would have been absolutely thrilled.'
Mrs Barr, of Brockham, Surrey, one of the UK's first anonymous egg donors, said she had discovered the identity of her recipient 'early on' and had been keen to get in contact with the family. She had done so after 'tactful and sensitive' help from the charity UK DonorLink, she said. The charity forwarded her letters to the Isherwoods, and she received an email from Jonathan just half an hour after the family heard from her.
She told the documentary, Donor Mum: The Children I've Never Met, that there had been a 'stark decrease' in the number of egg and sperm donors coming forward since the law giving anonymity to donors was lifted. 'I would say that it is evident from our experience that it can work and you can have a relationship and that people do not need to be threatened by it,' she said.
'There is a connection there, it is undeniable and I do not see anything wrong with it, everybody has their own opinion, but I feel it has been good, it has been a positive for all of us. 'It has got to have been positive for the twins to know that missing piece of their jigsaw.'
But when she read in the Daily Mail about Joan Isherwood, whose twins were born by an anonymous egg donation, Mrs Barr realised that she was the biological mother. And last night a BBC documentary showed the first meeting between Mrs Barr, Mrs Isherwood and their children.
The extraordinary story will contribute to the debate over the right of children born from donors to know the identity of their biological parents, a right enshrined in law since 2005.
Mrs Barr discovered that twins Katherine and Jonathan were her biological children after reading about Mrs Isherwood, and seeing her on TV discussing the death of her sons David, four, and Andrew, nine, killed in a terrible car crash which left her unable to conceive.
But she waited until the twins turned 18 before trying to contact them. Happily, they and their mother jumped at the chance to meet Mrs Barr 'I was very nervous, I didn't know what to expect,' she told the Daily Telegraph. 'There is no etiquette or protocol for such a thing but Joan came straight towards me and gave me a hug.
'It was surreal: I was looking into the eyes of my genetic children.' Mrs Barr made the decision to donate her eggs soon after the birth of son Eliott, now 20. She says that it was a struggle not to contact Katherine and Jonathan after she had discovered their identity.
'If I had lived nearer I would probably have gone and sat at the end of their road just to see them,' she said. Mrs Isherwood, of Warrington in Cheshire, said that the new family link was unexpected but welcome. 'We were told it was a totally anonymous decision and as far as I was concerned that was the end of it,' she told BBC Breakfast.
'But I often used to wonder because not only did Sylvia help to create the twins but she actually gave me my life back because I felt as though my life had been destroyed.' She added: 'I was so grateful to be given the chance to create a second family that had I met Sylvia on the day she donated the eggs I would have been absolutely thrilled.'
Mrs Barr, of Brockham, Surrey, one of the UK's first anonymous egg donors, said she had discovered the identity of her recipient 'early on' and had been keen to get in contact with the family. She had done so after 'tactful and sensitive' help from the charity UK DonorLink, she said. The charity forwarded her letters to the Isherwoods, and she received an email from Jonathan just half an hour after the family heard from her.
She told the documentary, Donor Mum: The Children I've Never Met, that there had been a 'stark decrease' in the number of egg and sperm donors coming forward since the law giving anonymity to donors was lifted. 'I would say that it is evident from our experience that it can work and you can have a relationship and that people do not need to be threatened by it,' she said.
'There is a connection there, it is undeniable and I do not see anything wrong with it, everybody has their own opinion, but I feel it has been good, it has been a positive for all of us. 'It has got to have been positive for the twins to know that missing piece of their jigsaw.'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
