India bans surrogacy for gay couples and single people

India faces criticism after officials issued new rules barring foreign gay couples and single people from using surrogate mothers to become parents. Commercial surrogacy is a booming industry in India, and in recent years the ranks of childless foreign couples looking for a low-cost, legally simple route to parenthood have been joined by gay couples and singles. The measures mark the first step to the regulation of "surrogacy tourism" in India. The rules say foreign couples seeking to enter into a surrogacy arrangement in India must be a "man and woman (who) are duly married and the marriage should be sustained at least two years". The rule changes, posted on the Indian home ministry's website, were denounced by fertility clinics and gay rights activists as "discriminatory". "Parenting is everybody's right and now we're withdrawing that right," said Dr Rita Bakshi, who heads the International Fertility Centre in New Delhi. "These rules are definitely not welcome, definitely restrictive and very discriminatory," she told AFP. "This is a huge heartbreak for homosexual couples and singles," commented fertility doctor Anoop Gupta. Gay rights campaigners also denounced the changes to the rules on surrogacy, which was legalised in 2002. "It's totally unfair - not only for gay people but for people who are not married who may have been living together for years, and for singles," Mumbai gay rights advocate Nitin Karani told AFP. India is a popular destination for gay couples seeking children even though it remains a largely conservative country and only decriminalised consensual sex between homosexuals in 2011. The home ministry would not comment on the changes which stipulate that would-be parents provide proof that their home country will give citizenship to any baby born of a surrogate mother. There have been several publicised cases of babies born through cross-border surrogacy in recent years who have been trapped in citizenship limbo because their parents' countries refused them passports. Surrogacy is banned in some European countries and is subject to strict regulation in the United States. The new India rules, which also state applicants must apply for a medical instead of a tourist visa, come as legislation to regulate the industry has yet to be passed by parliament. The bill says only women aged between 21 and 35 can act as surrogates but sets no minimum payment for the mother. Critics have said a lack of legislation governing surrogacy encourages "rent-a-womb" exploitation of young, poor Indian women. While the government has been pushing the country as a medical tourism destination, the issue of wealthy foreigners paying poor Indians to have babies has raised ethical concerns in many Indian minds. Clinic owners deny ill-treatment of mothers, saying it is in their interest to treat the women well in order for them to have healthy babies, The cost of surrogacy is about $18,000 to $30,000 in India, said Bakshi, of which around $8,000 goes to the surrogate mother. The figure is roughly a third of the US price. Hari Ramasubramanian, founding partner of Indian Surrogacy Law, said the new measures were introduced without "proper consultation" and needed to be challenged in the courts. "A lot of people who will be affected had seen India as a wonderful option for getting into parenthood and now this option is closed. It's quite sad," he said. Article: January 2013 www.telegraph.co.uk

US Lesbian couple to testify on behalf of sperm donor

A Separated lesbian couple have both been summoned to testify on behalf of a sperm donor, with whom they had made a written agreement, but who was ordered to pay child support after they split up. A Kansas judge recently ordered William Marotta, a sperm donor to a lesbian couple, to pay child support after they split up, raising questions of how the law protects sperm donors. Mr Marotta and the couple he donated to did not use official channels, and instead met up using a website, and wrote up their own agreement. Because the US state of Kansas did not have a legal way for same-sex couples to marry, when the couple split up, the Kansas Department of Children and Families sought out the biological father of the child, Mr Marotta, for child support. The court clerk’s office at Shawnee County District Court issued subpoenas on Wednesday for Angela Bauer and Jennifer L Schreiner. Reports suggest that the women have been ordered to appear on 15 February, in order to give depositions to an attorney for William Marotta, HutchNews reports. Laws in other states, such as New Jersey are similar to those in Kansas, said Bari Weinberger, a leading family law attorney, and managing partner of Weinberger Law Group. He said that the judge could legitimately rule that the contract written up by Mr Marotta, and the former couple was void, because they did not use official channels to complete the agreement. Mr Weinberger said that these definitions, and the liability of people in relationships with children in their care to pay child support, needed to be updated and clearly laid out. Article: 25th January 2013 www.pinknews.co.uk Read more about lesbian parenting and finding a sperm donor at www.prideangel.com

http://blogs.prideangel.com/post/2013/01/Fertile---Like-a-sack-of-fresh-compost.aspx

Our first insemination had taken place in mid-July. It had been a trial run. I was hoping to go on maternity leave around June, when my GCSE and A ‘level students’ exams would be over. So getting pregnant about September time would be ideal. We’d read a lot of books on the topic, some suggesting that it might take a year or more of inseminations before one was successful. Somewhere or other I’d read that each insemination has only a 6% chance of success. But then there were all the variables. I was thirty-four years old and was, like a supermarket on Shrove Tuesday, running rather low on eggs – well apparently, according to statistics. Nevertheless, I was healthy and not overweight; I had been taking pre-pregnancy vitamins for three months; my menstrual cycles were regular and I didn’t smoke. And, as a vet, my partner was both adept with a syringe and also very accustomed to poking around in various orifices. So we reckoned on ‘a few months’… maybe three? What when we got to five or six months? Get the sperm tested? Swap to the back-up uterus and egg supply? (The one obvious advantage a lesbian couple have in a quest for children.) We didn’t have a definite plan. I’d said there would be no point in taking a pregnancy test until my period was late: it seemed like a waste. That is until two days before my period was due, when I was overcome with an overwhelming desire to wee on a stick. Aged ten, I had awaited Father Christmas with more patience than this. Would our lives be permanently transformed by a tiny, screaming bundle of chaos, or would they not? I weed on the stick, and it seemed they would not. It had been a trial run and I whilst the statistics were confusing, I knew the chance of it working first time was unlikely. I hadn’t really wanted it to work this month. So the feeling of failure came as a surprise. The knowledge of a lonely, aging egg, taking its chance after thirty-four years of waiting, sighing at the devastating sight of carnage: a million sperm sprawled helplessly across my fallopian tube. Either my body had let me down, or I had let my body down, and we had both let everyone else down. Was I going to have to feel like this every month? My period came with the school holidays: the start of six weeks off work and two weeks off insemination. Time for a glass of wine… Two weeks later and we were returning from a short break in Paris for one day before setting off on a five-hour drive to the south coast to visit relatives. The one day back home was day fourteen, and another wee on a stick confirmed I had ovulated. So, between a hasty unpacking, washing, and repacking, we conveniently managed to fit in a visit from our donor (who was setting off the next day to northern France). We then spent two weeks visiting various relatives around the country, offering a range of imaginative responses as to why I was refusing both alcohol and caffeinated tea. We hadn’t told even close family of the baby project: I didn’t like the idea of their curiosity hanging over us every month like a dead cat, and we knew from coming out four years ago, that they generally coped quite well with surprises. Nevertheless, we were sure they were on to us. After all, the owners of the bed and breakfast at which we’d stayed in Southampton had guessed when I’d asked for my eggs well done. Ten days passed and it was weeing on stick time again. And again the feeling of failure. If I squinted a bit I could sort of see a hint of a blue line, but there was no doubt that it was negative. We hadn’t expected it to work first time, but now a pattern was emerging and the odds against me seemed to be rising. Next time we were to inseminate, I’d be almost thirty-five. Four days later and my breasts were feeling tender. “Pre-menstrual,” I told my partner. “You don’t get that do you?” “Yeah I do…I think I usually do.” But my period should have started today and it was now 11pm. “I think you should wee on a stick.” I hopped back into bed, with the stick, and we watched as a feint blue line began to form. It wasn’t as bold as the control line, but I didn’t have to squint to see it this time. “What do you think?” “I think it could be positive. You’d better do another test tomorrow.” For a good night’s sleep I’d recommend a warm, milky drink and a few pages of a good book. I would not recommend a semi-positive pregnancy test. I lay awake for most of the night and wondered what was happening to my body and why exactly we had decided to ambush the next twenty years of our lives. And, in case it wasn’t actually positive, I added in a chapter of wondering whether it would ever work. The next morning unsurprisingly found me skulking along the medical aisle of the supermarket, like a thirteen-year-old checking out the condoms. I selected a posh one. Digital. Actually flashes up with the word ‘Pregnant’ for those who find judging between shades of blue a little challenging. And, half an hour later back at home, that’s exactly what it did. Pregnant, it told me. And how odd it sounded to have that word describe me. Pregnant was mother, mummy, grown-up and prams. Not me at all. I took a photograph of the stick, for when the digital display had faded after 24 hours, and I didn’t believe it any more. We’d only tried twice. After thirty-four years of trying not to grow up, of confused sexuality and finding a lesbian identity, my body, apparently still as fertile as a sack of fresh compost, had just got straight on with what it had always been designed to do. I was pregnant. Winning article: by Lindsey, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom 27th January 2013

Gay marriage: MPs to vote on new proposals

MPs are set to get their first chance to vote on plans to allow same-sex marriages in England and Wales. The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill will be debated in Parliament on Tuesday 5 February, the leader of the Commons Andrew Lansley has announced. The bill will allow same-sex marriage and let religious organisations which want to, to offer them, the culture department says. The plans have divided the Conservative Party - its MPs will get a free vote. Labour and the Lib Dems back the proposals to legalise same-sex marriage, but Labour said the exemption for the established Church was "disappointing". The Church of England and Roman Catholics, among other denominations, have voiced opposition to the plans and are expected to oppose the bill, even with its caveats. But some religious groups, including Quakers, Unitarians and Liberal Judaism, are in favour. Culture Secretary Maria Miller told the Commons in December that no religious organisation "will ever be forced to conduct marriages for same-sex couples". She said the legislation - which will published on Friday ahead of the bill's second reading - would include a "quadruple lock" to protect religious freedom. Faith schools The bill is set to specifically exclude the Church of England and Church in Wales to avoid a clash between Canon Law - which defines marriage as that between a man and a woman - and UK civil law. But a spokesman for the Department for Culture, Media and Sport said that if the Church of England did want to opt-in to offering same-sex marriages it could, saying a process for doing so was to be set out in the bill. A public consultation on plans for same-sex marriage received 228,000 submissions. In its response to the consultation the government says it has no plans to change the definition of adultery or non-consummation of a marriage - which means neither could be cited as grounds for divorce in a same-sex marriage, unless the adultery was with someone of the opposite sex. Culture Secretary Maria Miller outlining the government's approach last month They also dismiss the fear that the terms "husband" and "wife" could be removed as a result of same sex marriages. They also say that teachers "particularly in faith schools will be able to continue to describe their belief that marriage is between a man and woman whilst acknowledging and acting within the new legislative position which enables same sex-couples to get married". The Scottish Government has published proposed legislation of its own to introduce gay marriage. Under the plans, religious and faith groups would need to "opt in" to perform same-sex marriages. Article: 24th August 2013 www.bbc.co.uk

Receiving: The recipient parent perspective - London 24th January

JZ Young Lecture Theatre, Ground Floor, Anatomy Building, Bloomsbury Campus, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK 24 January 2013 - 6.30pm-8.30pm The Progress Educational Trust project 'When It Takes More Than Two', supported by the Wellcome Trust, seeks to clarify public and professional understanding of donor conception by focusing on the different parties involved. This second event in the project will focus on the perspective of the recipient of donated sperm or eggs, and is free to attend, but advance booking is required. If you email Sandy Starr at sstarr@progress.org.uk then he will add you to the attendee list. • What traits do gamete recipients prefer in a donor, and what are the scientific facts about the heritability of such traits? Does preferring a tall donor (height is a widely preferred donor characteristic) or deprecating a red-haired donor (the world's largest sperm bank closed its doors to red-haired sperm donors in 2011 due to a reported lack of demand) actually give recipients any assurance as to the height and hair colour of their children? • What of more complex characteristics, such as intelligence and personality? The extent (if any) to which such qualities are heritable is a highly contentious, and yet these same qualities frequently form the basis on which donors are marketed. Donor profiles provided by clinics also include such details as pierced ears, choice of car and favourite pet - can a choice of donor made on such grounds be meaningful, and if so how? • To what extent is it necessary or desirable to seek a 'matching' donor, whose looks resemble those of the recipient couple (at a generic level such as skin colour)? Is this important to avoid inviting questions about a child's provenance, or should we aspire to put such thinking behind us? Are such questions rendered moot by the limited availability of sperm and egg donors in the UK, which can make matching difficult or impossible? • Following donor conception, what are the challenges (if any) involved in raising donor-conceived children? Is it always incumbent upon parents to inform their children of the fact that they are donor conceived, in line with official support for the principle of openness? In what circumstances might parents inform family, friends, colleagues or teachers of the fact that their children are donor-conceived? And what if this is disclosed inadvertently? • What are the specific challenges (if any) faced by non-traditional families, which involve same-sex couples and/or co-parenting arrangements, when it comes to donor conception? What is the impact on such families of being less readily accommodated by established social conventions and institutions? And is this changing? Speakers include: • Dr Nicky Hudson Senior Research Fellow at De Montfort University's School of Applied Social Sciences • Olivia Montuschi Cofounder and Practice Consultant at the Donor Conception Network • Sue Moore Senior Fertility Counsellor at the Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust's Assisted Conception Unit • Professor Marcus Pembrey Founding Chair of Trustees at PET and Emeritus Professor of Paediatric Genetics at University College London's Institute of Child Health • Caroline Spencer Co-Active Coach and Cognitive Behavioural Hypnotherapist at Successfully Single Chair: • Juliet Tizzard Head of Policy and Communications at the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority and former Director of PET Article: 22nd January 2012 www.progress.org.uk

Baby boom in UK pushing maternity services to 'tipping point'

A baby boom has pushed maternity services in the UK to a ''crucial tipping point'', with midwives under intense strain and hospitals struggling to cope. The Royal College of Midwives (RCM) says there is a massive shortage of midwives after some areas of the UK has seen a 50 per cent rise in the number of births in the last few years. In a report to be published in parliament on Tuesday, the RCM warned that an extra 5,000 midwives were needed in England alone to deal with the highest birth rate in 40 years. It is calling on the Government to provide a guarantee not to cut midwife training places. Each of the four parts of the UK has experienced a rise in the number of births in the last decade - 22 per cent in England, 17 per cent in Wales, 15 per cent in Northern Ireland and 12 per cent in Scotland. The RCM said England and Wales had been "overwhelmed" by the rising birth rate, but while midwife numbers were increasing a little the strain on numbers has led to antenatal care of expectant mothers becoming "threadbare". There are also concerns about an ageing number of midwives, with too few following in their footsteps. Cathy Warwick, chief executive of the RCM, said: "England remains around 5,000 midwives short of the number required to provide mothers and babies with high-quality service they need and deserve. "Maternity care is the earliest health intervention of all and getting care right for mothers and babies is a vital part of supporting families and building a foundation for good health in later life." She said that while more midwives are being employed in England and the availability of training is on the rise, efforts need to be redoubled because of the baby boom and the relentless rise in the numbers being born. "A corner is being turned, but this is no time for backsliding from the Government," she said. "Maternity units are under intense strain and have been now for many years, with many midwives really at the end of their tether in terms of what they can tolerate. "We are reaching a crucial tipping point for maternity services in England." The shortage of midwives has forced some NHS maternity hospitals to close their doors and temporarily turn women away who are about to give birth, according to the Sunday Times. An RCM report last year found more than half of NHS trusts had to close their door an average of seven times a year and divert women to other maternity hospitals because they could not cope with numbers, the newspaper said. Jon Skewes, a director at the RCM, said: "We are concerned that our members are so stretched and that in some circumstances units have been forced to close on a temporary basis to ensure safety." The RCM says it would like to see more midwife-led units and more home births to reduce the shortage of midwives, the appropriate deployment of properly trained and supervised maternity support workers and a guarantee from the Government not to cut midwife training places. The State of Maternity Services report showed that in 2011 there were 688,120 babies born in England, the highest number since 1971. Provisional birth numbers from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) for the first half of last year point to 2012 being another record-breaking year for births. The ONS forecasts that births in England could reach 743,000 by 2014. Article: 20th January 2012 www.telegraph.co.uk

'Glad to have gay parents' said majority of Oxford union students

Overwhelming majority of Oxford Union students would be ‘glad to have gay parents’ The outcome of the debate was that the motion of 'gay parents' was supported by a large majority (Image: Ross Brooks) In an Oxford Union debate on Thursday evening, the subject of which being gay parenting, the motion passed with a large majority. The traditional Thursday evening debate, on the topic “this house would be glad to have gay parents”, took place, and the motion was carried with 345 votes to 21. Arguing for the motion, the winning team of the debate, was PinkNews.co.uk and Out4Marriage founder, Benjamin Cohen, gay rights activist, Richard Fairbass of the band Right Said Fred, and Phyll Opoku-Gyimah of Black Pride UK. Debating against the motion was Peter D Williams of Catholic Voices, anti-abortion activist Anthony McCarthy and anti-equality activist, Lynette Burrows. Scott Lively, a staunch anti-gay evangelical Christian, was scheduled to speak at the debate, but was unable to attend because of an administrative oversight which meant he did not travel to the UK. He was replaced on the ‘against’ panel by George Hargreaves, the leader of the Christian Party. Arguing for the motion, PinkNews.co.uk founder, Benjamin Cohen, said: “When I get married to my gay partner I will have a wedding, like my parents did, not a ‘gay’ wedding”. Ms Burrows said as part of her argument against the motion that Benjamin Cohen would be a “pretend father’ and criticised the motion as “sinister”. She went on to say that it would be a “travesty” for any child to have same-sex parents. She also implied that it society should go back to a time when gay people were considered “sodomites”. Scott Lively will speak in two weeks time at another debate on a different topic. In a decision which some found controversial the Oxford Union had previously announced that BNP leader Nick Griffin would “not be turned away” if he decided to attend a scheduled debate on gay parenting, despite Mr Griffin’s official invitation being withdrawn. The invitation to speak at the Thursday evening debate was originally extended to Mr Griffin as a potential speaker against the motion. However, the invitation had been withdrawn after it emerged that the Union member who extended it did not have the proper authorisation to do so. The Union also drew criticism over its decision to invite American author, attorney, and activist Scott Lively. Mr Lively recently termed homosexuality “the issue of the End Times”, and said it would lead to events such as in Noah’s flood. Article: 18th January 2013 www.pinknews.co.uk

India surrogacy - New law cuts off Australian parents

Changes to commercial surrogacy arrangements in India, introduced just before Christmas, have cut off one of the more popular avenues for Australians wanting to become surrogate parents. While heading overseas for commercial surrogacy is illegal in Queensland, New South Wales and the ACT, hundreds of Australians still flew to India every year to become parents. But now the Indian government has issued a directive that only couples who have been married for more than two years can enter into commercial surrogacy arrangements, and only if it is legal in their home country. Queensland lawyer Stephen Page - a surrogacy specialist who has represented many Australian surrogate parents - says the policy changes in India have already had a huge impact. "Essentially, if you want to go to India in future for surrogacy, you've got to be married for a minimum of two years - gay marriage is excluded - and surrogacy must be legal back home," he said. "The only place where commercial surrogacy can occur in Australia is the Northern Territory. "So unless you're in a heterosexual, married relationship for two years and you're living in the Northern Territory, you can forget about going to India." Mr Page says the majority of people who went to India before the law was changed were not married. "They were either living in a de facto relationship or they're in a same-sex relationship or they were singles," he said. "I believe instead of about 200 children a year being born to Australian-intended parents a year, it will be down to five or 10." He says the rule change will not stop Australians entering into commercial surrogacy arrangements overseas. They will simply look elsewhere. "The strange thing is, it's outlawed at the state level, but at the federal level it's not," he said. "At the federal level, you can go overseas and all that you need to establish is that the child is yours and then the child is entitled to Australian citizenship." Article: 16th January 2013 www.abc.net.au

Pride Angel nominated Family Provider/Initiative of the Year

We're delighted to have been nominated for this year’s 'G3 Readers awards 2013'. Introducing the Awards, G3 says: “The Awards are designed to showcase those individuals and organisations who have demonstrated an outstanding commitment to the LGBT community. We believe that those who go the extra mile to ensure equality of opportunity and fair treatment for all, deserve to be recognised.” Pride Angel has been short listed within the category of 'Family Provider/Initiative of the Year’ The shortlisted nominations include: - Pride Angel - London Women’s Clinic - L Group Families - PACT - Natalie Gamble Associates Vote for Pride Angel for being gay owned and run and for our contribution to the LGBT community helping create hundreds of LGBT families with pride! ....and just for voting for your favourite nominations you will be entered into a FREE DRAW for a chance to win tickets to the event. We would love for you to show your support by voting for Pride Angel. It will only take a minute, just click on the link below now to vote: www.outg3awards.co.uk Nominations for all categories were short-listed based on their ability to be gay friendly and their contribution to the LGBT community. Article: 14th January 2013 Pride Angel

Penelope Cruz's sister turned to anoymous sperm donor to get pregnant

Penelope Cruz's younger sister Monica has admitted that she turned to an anonymous sperm donor to get pregnant. Monica, 35, was worried that she would not meet the man of her dreams in time to start a family and so sought help through artificial insemination. The model revealed the truth about her pregnancy on her web based blog for Spanish newspaper El País. Monica, who models for luxury lingerie brand Agent Provocateur, said that she would have preferred to wait for a perfect match but feared 'it would then be too late for motherhood and [I] could not wait'. She wrote: 'I am going to be a mother! I have managed to fulfill the dream of a lifetime. 'Because of that I want to share with all of you this special journey and to be able to tell you about all my experiences during this fascinating time.' Monica decided to speak publicly about her pregnancy to address the inevitable questions she would get about the identity of the father. Keeping an air of dignity she deliberately 'isolated' and hid herself away from the world during the first few weeks of pregnancy in order to avoid making money from her private life. She said: 'I wanted to avoid, above all, that they spoke about possible fathers or the possible candidates to be it. 'So I have decided to tell all. To become pregnant, I turned to artificial insemination. 'I want to tell, also, so I can have the opportunity to show my thanks to all those anonymous men that help to give many women like me, the dream of their lives.' Monica felt uneasy about hiding the manner in which she was able to get pregnant but is happy to be helping make the topic less taboo. Article: 11th January 2013 www.dailymail.co.uk

Tricky legal situation for sperm donors in Kansas

Kansas sperm donor being sued by the state for child support put himself in a precarious legal position by donating to a lesbian couple using artificial insemination at home. Kansas law states that a sperm donor is not the father of a child if a doctor handles the artificial insemination. But the law does not specifically address the donor's rights and obligations when no doctor was involved. That was the case in 2009, when William Marotta answered an online ad for a sperm donation for Angela Bauer and her then-partner, Jennifer Schreiner. The three signed an agreement they believed severed Marotta's parental rights, and Schreiner became pregnant. But because they didn't go through a doctor, the state argues, Marotta is the legal father and should be responsible for about $6,000 in public assistance Schreiner received to help care for the child. The state also wants him to pay child support, though neither woman is asking for money. Marotta's attorney said Thursday that the law is outdated. But legal experts agreed that Marotta and the women put themselves in the predicament. "I don't fault the state for this," said Corey Whelan, who runs workshops for lesbian couples interested in having children through the New York-based American Fertility Association. "I don't think this is a homophobic issue. I think this is a financially driven issue." Whelan said her group has a long-standing practice of advising single women who want a child to work with doctors and attorneys. She said avoiding professionals is "a buyer-beware proposition." But money can be a factor. Artificial insemination generally isn't covered by health insurance and usually costs between $2,000 and $3,000, said Steve Snyder, a Minnesota-based attorney and chairman of the American Bar Association's group on assisted reproduction technology. "It is happening a lot," Snyder said. " A lot of LGBT couples use home insemination kits. I have a lot of cases involving those types of kits or people who intend to use them." That sets up a tricky legal situation, said Dr. Ajay Nangia, the former ethics chairman of the American Society of Andrology, a national medical group for male reproductive health. "The problem is the guy exposed himself to a situation that made him potentially liable because he had no legal protection," said Nangia, an associate professor of urology at the University of Kansas Hospital. Still, Ben Swinnen, one of Marotta's attorneys, said his 46-year-old client cannot be declared the father of Schreiner's now 3-year-old daughter because of the written agreement with the two women. He pointed to laws in nine states that say a sperm or egg donor is not the parent of a child conceived through artificial reproduction. "The state of Kansas is lagging behind in following the trend," he said. "It is a freeze, in my opinion, on artificial insemination and alternative family settings." He also believes state officials' pursuit of Marotta's case in Kansas, where voters approved a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage in 2005, is designed to reinforce the definition of a family as a married man and woman, and their children. He said the state is trying to send a message that, "anything else is no good." But the Kansas Department for Children and Families, which started pursuing Marotta in October, argued in a court filing Wednesday that at least 10 other states require a doctor's involvement in artificial insemination for a sperm donor to be protected from having to pay child support. "It's a commonsense law," said Washington state-based attorney Mark Demaray, a past president of an organization for attorneys who handle assisted reproduction legal issues. "It's very common for them to have to go through a doctor's office and get a sworn statement from the doctor that he or she performed this procedure." Marotta is trying to get the case dismissed. A hearing is scheduled in April in Shawnee County District Court. Article: 4th January 2013 www.news.yahoo.com Erika from Pride Angel stated 'The law regarding sperm donation varies from country to country and within different states.' 'It's really important to seek legal advice when choosing a known donor and to consider taking the donor to a licensed fertility clinic for treatment.' 'In the UK married couples and lesbian couples in civil partnerships are considered the legal parents, regardless of whether the insemination is carried out within a clinic or at home using an artificial insemination kit'. Erika continues.... 'However it is more tricky for single women choosing to have a child with a known donor. The sperm donor would be seen as the legal parent in the eyes of the law, unless they conceived through a clinic'

How sperm and egg donation is changing - Can you help with research?

Stephen Whyte a social sciences researcher from Australia recently asked for people to help him with his study, by completing an online survey. Stephen would like to thank everyone who contributed from Pride Angel. He is delighted to have received approximately 70% of the amount of completed surveys needed to go ahead with the study. But he still needs more people to complete his work. Whether you are looking for a donor, you are a donor or considering donating - your views are valued." Reproductive Medicine has evolved rapidly over the past four decades since the first IVF child was born in the late 1970’s. Unfortunately social research into the field of donor insemination & IVF has not moved as quickly. Over the previous decade the internet has enabled and facilitated a new forum for potential parents to pursue the gift of life. A developing market for people seeking more than is currently on offer from private sperm banks, public health systems, policy makers and governments. More about Stephen..... My name is Stephen Whyte and I am a social sciences researcher from Queensland University of Technology in Brisbane (QUT), Australia. I’m conducting research into the changing market for Donors and women seeking donors for DI, IUI, ICSI and IVF treatment. As a father of three beautiful sons myself, I am lucky enough to already know “why” people are seeking the amazing gift of parenthood. What my study is seeking to establish is the driving factors behind the potential parents and donors seeking to step away from the current public and private sector options for donor insemination treatment. My research aims to better understand the participants in this new market place (Website Forums for Donation), so that fiscal policy and legislation can affect more socially beneficial outcomes. Government policy is often based on stringent un-biased academic research such as the type I am attempting to conduct. I am seeking to better understand the donors and potential parents involved in websites such as Pride Angel. To do this I first need to have an understanding of the people involved and what has brought them to participate in such online forums. I have created a short survey that takes approximately five - ten minutes for donors and ten – fifteen minutes for people seeking donors to fill in. The survey does not ask you to personally identify yourself, it is completely anonymous. We do not wish to identify you now or in the future. What we do want is a general demographic outline of you, so as to form a better idea of what has brought you to this forum. Understanding how you have got to this point, the factors that drive you and what is influencing your selection is the essence of this research. Thank you for taking the time to read this blog. I would ask and hope that you follow the links below, fill in our survey and help us in our research endeavour. Thank you and good luck in your pursuit of the amazing gift of life. If you are a donor please fill in the survey at this link: www.survey.qut.edu.au If you are looking for a donor please fill in the survey at this link: www.survey.qut.edu.au Article: 8th January 2013 by Stephen Whyte - Social sciences researcher from Queensland University of Technology in Brisbane (QUT), Australia Looking for a sperm or egg donor, or want to help others by donating, visit www.prideangel.com

http://blogs.prideangel.com/post/2013/01/Choosing-a-reputable-Sperm-Donor-Website.aspx

Perhaps inevitably, the World Wide Web now has a role in that most human of accomplishments; procreation. Sperm donor websites are becoming increasingly popular in the UK with many people now searching for a sperm donor or co-parent online. The demand for this has been partly fuelled by the vagaries of the NHS. Many health authorities are cutting back on IVF treatments because of the expense, trusts already refuse treatments for single and lesbian couples and these factors coupled with the shortage of sperm donors here in the UK seem to be pushing the advantages of the internet over the more traditional clinic route. For those looking to create their own family, are these websites a realistic option? Could they even pose a health threat? Like dating online, isn’t there something potentially seedy or unknown about such an endeavour? Or do these websites provide the transparency, advice and directness of purpose that people who just want to be parents are in need of? Whatever the risks, these services have swiftly established their legitimacy as a resource, enabling people with limited options to choose for themselves where and from whom that all important genetic material comes from. We spoke to Pride Angel, a leading online facility, for their views. The issues facing those using such a website include the benefits of using a known donor, anonymity law, working alongside fertility clinics and the importance of using a reputable sperm donor website. Pride Angel is one of the foremost worldwide connection sites, with over 19,000 members. Though primarily aimed at the gay and lesbian community they are dedicated to providing quality information regarding health screening and fertility law for all. Created and run by Erika and Karen, they aim to equip those who need it with the knowledge and support necessary to negotiate such a potentially delicate undertaking. Both scientists, they are passionate about improving the services available for those looking to become parents. Not just academically qualified, Karen has fostered and personally experienced conception using the sperm of a known donor. Using a known sperm donor There has been a social and cultural shift in recent times, towards women wishing to meet a known donor. This could be because of high fertility costs, or perhaps the shortage of donors, whichever, the benefits of knowing who exactly will be credited with creating your own bundle of joy cannot be denied. There has been much research and evidence which has shown that children who know the identity of their donor and the honest circumstances of their conception from an early age are more secure with their identity as they become adults. Another plus is the potential for a prospective mother to meet a like minded individual who is happy to stay in touch, albeit, at a distance, omitting the longing within their child to meet an unknown donor as they grow up. Anonymity law and future children The change to the anonymity law in 2005 was certainly a positive thing for donor conceived children, allowing them to trace the identity of their donor at age 18. However we are still to really discover the effect this will have on the thousands of children who may be wanting to meet their biological father in the future; they may find that the donor is simply not interested in being contacted. There is also the worry that the donor may not be the kind of person the mother would wish for their child to meet, after all, she may have only received basic details such as height and eye colour by which to choose her donor originally. There is also the very real concern of genetic attraction, something which especially affects parents and children who have never met before adulthood. The repercussions of this could be catastrophic. When the effects of this law are eventually felt, in the year 2023 and beyond (eighteen years after the law was introduced in 2005) will it be felt that children were better off not having access to this information? Would it not therefore be far better for donor conceived children to have known of their donor from the beginning? Websites working alongside fertility clinics Sperm donor websites assist in the much needed recruitment of donors and help bring together co-parents and the creation of alternative families in a way which clinics are less able to do. By working alongside the authorities and regulated clinics, websites can therefore provide a much needed service, providing they are educating their users about any health risks and legal considerations. A spokesman for the HFEA (Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority) is advising people to only use sperm donor websites which direct their users to a licensed clinic, ensuring that complete health screening is completed and that a record of the donor’s name is kept on file. Choosing a reputable sperm donor website When choosing to use a sperm donor website to find a donor or co-parent it is important to ensure that they are providing the necessary health screening and legal advice and directing users to use regulated fertility clinics for treatment. Erika, co-founder of Pride Angel highlights the advantages of their connection site and the safeguarding in place; ’All profiles are continually screened to ensure users are not offering ‘natural’ insemination or requesting an anonymous donor. Nor is payment for donations allowed to be offered or requested. If any donor attempts to contact more than 10 different recipients, an email is automatically sent, highlighting the ‘no more than 10 live births law within the UK’. She continues, ‘We are committed to providing a user friendly service, while ensuring that we do everything within our power to make it a safer environment for our members. We also offer email support for users requiring help and further information. Users should never consider using a donor who offers natural insemination, even if they offer artificial insemination as well. The health risks of such promiscuous donors are too great. Unfortunately many other connection services do not monitor profiles and restrict messages in the way that we do at Pride Angel. This means that many of the more prolific donors tend to use other sites which do not monitor them as closely. These factors are really important to consider when choosing a connection service to find a known donor or co-parent’ A bleak thought and a fair warning of the realities and risks inherent in such a situation but Erika is keen to point out that for most, the benefits of the self determination and choice Pride Angel provides far outstrips the negatives. ‘We have had so many people thank us for the service we provide, without which co-parenting arrangements would not happen and many lesbian couples and gay men would not have the chance to experience the joys of parenthood’ For more information regarding finding a co-parent, health screening, home insemination and fertility law visit and register for FREE at www.prideangel.com Article: 6th Januray 2013 Pride Angel

A third of male cancer patients not being told about fertility options

Pioneering research presented at the Fertility 2013 conference today (Thursday 3 January 2013) shows that a large proportion of male cancer patients are missing out on appropriate fertility advice. Sperm banking is routinely recommended for all men diagnosed with cancer who are at risk of long-term infertility, caused by treatment such as chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Infertility can be permanent or temporary depending on the individual's circumstances and men may need to attend follow-up appointments to assess their fertility in the years after they have been discharged from cancer treatment. These appointments are important to receive appropriate fertility advice and in light of current sperm banking regulations which state sperm samples should be disposed of after 10 years if ongoing infertility cannot be confirmed. Dr Allan Pacey, Senior Lecturer in Andrology, and Professor Christine Eiser, Professor in Psychology, at the University of Sheffield sent questionnaires to 499 male cancer survivors aged between 18 and 55 who had undergone cancer treatment more than five years ago and had taken the opportunity to bank sperm in either Sheffield or Nottingham. The research, funded by Cancer Research UK, showed that of the 193 responses over a third of men (36 per cent) had never attended a follow-up appointment to assess their fertility, with a further third (33 per cent) only attending on one occasion. Dr Allan Pacey said: "Trying to engage men with this subject is notoriously difficult. For those of us who run sperm banks, many men store their sperm and then do not contact us again, even though there are legal reasons to keep in contact. "Our research suggests that there is a need to educate men about the benefits of attending follow-up fertility clinics and the long-term consequences of non-attendance." Non-attendance was found to be more likely in men who had suffered fewer side-effects at the time of treatment, had a more negative experience of banking sperm and had a more negative attitude to the disposal of sperm. Missing follow-up appointments to monitor fertility means cancer survivors do not receive education and options available to them. In many cases, men may also be unaware their sperm may be disposed of if ongoing infertility cannot be confirmed. This could have a major impact on their future life choices and ability to father children. The study shows new education strategies are urgently needed on an ongoing basis from the time of diagnosis to inform men about the importance of fertility monitoring as well as encouraging more men to attend these follow-up appointments, with patients receiving timely letters from clinics highlighting the benefits of attendance. Professor Christine Eiser said: "Sperm banking is highly valued by men who want the option to have children once cancer treatment is completed. "Our research found that many men do not know how cancer treatment can affect their fertility or the likelihood of fertility recovery over the long-term. Having received a cancer diagnosis, patients immediately need to take in a lot of information regarding treatments and side-effects and it can be challenging to discuss potential longer-term effects on fertility at this time. We therefore need a mechanism to ensure that men are given information about fertility issues at a later date and certainly before treatment ends." Article: 4th January 2012 www.news-medical.net

Pink Singers Winter Concert - P.S. We're 30

P.S. We're 30 Pink Singers Winter Concert Cadogan Hall, Sloane Square, London Saturday 19th January, 7.30 pm 2013 sees the Pink Singers celebrating their 30th birthday! Brighten up your winter and join them for an unmissable evening of entertainment, featuring some of their best songs from the past three decades. Renowned for embracing a wide range of styles and genres, the Pink Singers have been delighting audiences since 1983, when they were formed to add music to that year’s Gay Pride march. The Pink Singers are Europe’s oldest LGBT community choir; fighting stereotypes and bringing a message of inclusiveness they have grown and adapted to reflect a changing society –making their own kind of music in support along the way. They will be celebrating their journey in style with this unmissable event, showcasing some of their best numbers by Sondheim, Mozart, Karl Jenkins, Massive Attack and many more. So come along and wipe those January blues away as they pull out all the stops with an eclectic and energetic show of song, dance, comedy, and a few surprises along the way…after all, it’s not every year you turn 30! Book Tickets Tel: 020 7730 4500 www.pinksingers.co.uk/tickets Article: 2nd January 2012 www.pinksingers.co.uk