Do genes matter? Daughter of a donor discusses

On Thursday, I went to an event entitled Do Genes Matter? Families and Donor Conception. Organised by the PET (Progress Educational Trust) it promised to look at what genetics means for our understanding of family in light of donor conception. On materials promoting the event, the questions to be covered were laid out as follows: • What does it mean to have a child through donor conception? • What is donor conception like for the non-genetic parent? • How do grandparents feel about having a grandchild who is conceived with the help of an egg, sperm or embryo donor? • What is the role of the internet in finding donors or connecting with half-siblings? • How many parents can a child have? However, in my eyes, the vital – and missing – question that needed to be asked was: • What do genetics mean for the ‘donor’ conceived person? This was the glaring great hole in the whole event. Chaired by Walter Merricks from the Donor Conception Network, a panel of speakers included academics, fertility lawyers and campaigners. Interesting people with differing expertise and interests in ‘donor’ conception. But, were there ANY ‘donor’ conceived people themselves present on the panel? People who could speak to their OWN experience of the practice and their own feelings on genetic connections. As you may have guessed – no. Lack of representation To me, this really just sums up the entire problem with the social dialogue around ‘donor’ conception. That the voice of the ‘donor’ conceived is missing from this type of event speaks volumes. Because the rhetoric around ‘donor’ conception springs from the mouths of those wanting the answer it provides, or those promoting it as an answer, hearing from the product of this practice is not necessarily a great fit. As always, I am aware that there are many ‘donor’ conceived people who say – or at least purport – that they are uninterested in genetics and also many who are very much at peace with being conceived by a ‘donor’. I respect that perspective. But that there is a significant group of ‘donor’ conceived people who feel very much interested in genetic connections – whether they are at peace with being ‘donor’ conceived or not – should, in my view, be acknowledged in the public discourse about the practice. Is it not crucial to hear from the ‘donor’ conceived at an event about the ‘donor’ conceived? I think this is what it must have felt like for women before they had the vote – silenced, voiceless, talked over, written about and unconsidered. This may seem over the top, but I feel that for my voice to be heard here, in this type of debate, is as much part of a historical struggle as female suffrage once was. Read more... Article: www.daughterofadonor.com