Why are sperm donors anonymous?

[Cheetah]

Simple enough question I think.

Why are sperm donors allowed to be anonymous?

While it is a sad fact of life that some people may go through their lives never knowing who one or both of their parents are/were, why is it allowed to intentionally and deliberately deprive children of knowledge about their father through sperm donors?

Personally, I'm very proud of my father and of where I come from, and I'm pretty sure I would have had lots of questions and unfulfilled needs if I hadn't known.

If, in a hypothetical scenario, my mother had conceived me through the help of an anonymous sperm donor, and knowingly and deliberately deprived me of knowing my own father, I'm not sure if I would have ever been able to forgive her.

Why the hell are sperm donors allowed to be anonymous?! It is nothing more than a crime against the children conceived this way.

Edit:
And here I found some recent news on the topic as well:
http://www.nationalpost.com/Children+have+fundamental+right+father+identity+sperm+donor+trial+hears/3724417/story.html

VANCOUVER — Olivia Pratten knows this much about her biological father: he’s Caucasian, has brown hair and blue eyes, and has type A blood. But she’s missing a major clue to his identity — his name.

Lawyer Joseph Arvay argued before a B.C. Supreme Court judge Monday that Pratten, 28, and thousands of others who are offspring of anonymous sperm or egg donors have a “fundamental” right to know the identity of their biological parents.

“She just wants to know who this person is that gave her life,” Arvay said.

Ms. Pratten’s lawsuit against the provincial government — believed to be the first of its kind in Canada — seeks to amend the B.C. Adoption Act to require physicians to keep permanent records of all egg, sperm or embryo donors and to allow offspring to access those records when they turn 19.

If adopted children have the right to know about their birth parents when they turn 19, then offspring of “gamete” donors should have the same right to know about theirs, Mr. Arvay said.

Not having that right relegates Ms. Pratten to “second-class citizen” status and represents the province’s “wholesale abandonment” of equality rights, Arvay said.

Outside court on Monday morning Ms. Pratten, who was born in British Columbia but now works in Ontario as a journalist, said knowing her father is “part of my identity.”

“It’s part of my health history,” she said. “Half my biological origins are unknown and a mystery to me and are being withheld.”

 

[mangxema]

Because that's kind of the point? Very few men would ever donate if there was a chance that they could have to pay child support.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

I dont know my father anyways. I imagine quite a few kids are the same way.

 

[Cheetah]

Because that's kind of the point? Very few men would ever donate if there was a chance that they could have to pay child support.

That just makes it worse. I have to pay for the offspring of other men!

I dont know my father anyways. I imagine quite a few kids are the same way.

As I said, while it can happen, it should not be the rule, and it definitely should not be actively pursued.

 

[History_Buff]

Because that's kind of the point? Very few men would ever donate if there was a chance that they could have to pay child support.

A valid concern, but it would be fairly simple to amend the laws such that those who conceive a child through a registered gamete donation clinic are not eligible to sue the donors for child support.

And as the article says, the children of said process wouldn't be able to demand the identity of their parent until they were 19 (or other age of majority), at which point you can't claim child support for them anyway.

 

[Millman]

Since when have did everyone have to be fully open about what they do?

That sounds like a trollish answer but to clarify what I mean that's where anti-trust, liablity, accountability comes in. If they are private and fund themselves through their own work they don't have to tell anyone jack squat.

If they do it with my money through taxes then I'd be entitled to know everything about it.

The underlying hint is that life and knowledge demand to be spread if it can happen this way in addition to naturally imo.

 

[Miles Teg]

That just makes it worse. I have to pay for the offspring of other men!

No, the people who agreed to get a sperm donation pay for it. Calm down, your wallet isn't being threatened.

Anyways, it's a difficult situation. I really think people should adopt if they can't conceive due to infertility or gender or whatever. However, there is a sizable market of people who refuse to adopt and still want kids. The needs of the children, biological father and (sometermidon'tknow) parents all conflict here.

Incidentally, sperm donation is probably only a stopgap solution in technological terms. While some cases are going to be tricky (gay men), it's entirely reasonable to think we should be able to get anyone pregnant within in this century, and most people within 50 years.

 

[Zelig]

A man who donates sperm anonymously is not a father.

Incidentally, sperm donation is probably only a stopgap solution in technological terms. While some cases are going to be tricky (gay men), it's entirely reasonable to think we should be able to get anyone pregnant within in this century, and most people within 50 years.

It's reasonable to think we'll evenutally be able to grow people in artificial wombs outside of a human body.

 

[Cheetah]

No, the people who agreed to get a sperm donation pay for it. Calm down, your wallet isn't being threatened.

Anyways, it's a difficult situation. I really think people should adopt if they can't conceive due to infertility or gender or whatever. However, there is a sizable market of people who refuse to adopt and still want kids. The needs of the children, biological father and (sometermidon'tknow) parents all conflict here.

Incidentally, sperm donation is probably only a stopgap solution in technological terms. While some cases are going to be tricky (gay men), it's entirely reasonable to think we should be able to get anyone pregnant within in this century, and most people within 50 years.

Perhaps that comment of mine was unwise. My main objection to anonymous sperm donors is not whether or not I have to pay anything (in)directly through taxes for the cost of raising a child conceived in that manner.

My main objection stems from how I feel about having a father, and how I view the importance of heritage and ancestry. I don't need to go too many generations back before my family was very poor and not exceptional (not that we're anything special now either of course - but maybe some day? ), but I'm still extremely proud of knowing where I come from and having a family tree.

If my mother had willingly deprived me of this, I can't help but thinking I would be extremely angry and hurt by what she'd done.

And I assume many other people feel the same, and that people conceived this way actually do feel this way.

Then, knowing how insanely strong willed the anti-gay-marriage people are, and their cries for "all children need one father and one mother", I find it very amazing that they would simply let something that completely deprives a child of one parent simply pass without raising the same kind of protests. The least they could have done was to place the same limits on using donated sperm as for adoption, so that each child would have two parents!

I feel this is a wrong committed towards the children by egoistic and stupid women/couples and the people who allow this to happen. And it is also a wrong committed towards all the children who have already lost their parents and are in need for adoption.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Well I read that adoption is a bit of a pain because theres a shortage of "good" kids. And a lot of the ones who actually need adoption are disabled or have issues or something.

 

[Cheetah]

A man who donates sperm anonymously is not a father.

If the sperm is used to bring forth a child, he is.

It's reasonable to think we'll evenutally be able to grow people in artificial wombs outside of a human body.

It is reasonable to think we'll be able to do many things eventually. The question is should we do it!

I'm completely convinced that the human psyche needs both strong male and female role models to have the best possible chance of growing up to be a normal, healthy human being.

A couple of one man and one woman is the best fit for this, but two men or two women may also achieve it if they have relatives or friends willing to help. While single mothers (or in the future - fathers) may also achieve this with help, they are only a single person and will thus lack time and resources that couples can spend to raise their children. Thus, I find it very wrong that single people are allowed access to anonymous sperm to become mothers.

 

[mangxema]

A valid concern, but it would be fairly simple to amend the laws such that those who conceive a child through a registered gamete donation clinic are not eligible to sue the donors for child support.

And as the article says, the children of said process wouldn't be able to demand the identity of their parent until they were 19 (or other age of majority), at which point you can't claim child support for them anyway.

Well, laws can change, but fair enough. The question though was why are they anonymous, and my answer is that, by and large, if it's not, guys won't donate. I recall reading an article somewhere where in some place or other, the donation rate dropped sharply after requiring a simple registration (i.e., an identity). Don't remember where though.

 

[Perfection]

Because I don't wanna listen to some whiny kid drone on about stupid crap.

 

[Shadylookin]

Some college kid jizzed in a cup for some beer money. There's no endearing personal story to be had. The kids are just going to have to man up and get over it.

 

[Zelig]

If the sperm is used to bring forth a child, he is.

No, he simply donated some genetic material; not, in my opinion, a sufficient condition to declare him a father.

 

[Shekwan]

Should man be allowed jizz anywhere he pleases without the legal cloak of anonymity? Absolutely not is the answer.

After all, if man were accountable for his jizz the wellbeing of society as we know it would be threatened. We can't afford that!

 

[Hygro]

Heritage matters. I don't know why it matters. Maybe it shouldn't matter. But for whatever reason it matters. I think people have a right to know who their biological ancestors are, including the 19 yr old college student looking for an extra buck who provided the sperm.

 

[Skwink]

That just makes it worse. I have to pay for the offspring of other men!

Well then don't have a kid.

 

[otago]

The choice is break a promise to those men that they will not be identified and then watch the sperm donations dry up, no pun.

Would you want the chance of some sod saying you owe him money for college ?

 

[wolfigor]

My main objection stems from how I feel about having a father, and how I view the importance of heritage and ancestry. I don't need to go too many generations back before my family was very poor and not exceptional (not that we're anything special now either of course - but maybe some day? ), but I'm still extremely proud of knowing where I come from and having a family tree.

Well... even if a child is born from anonymously donated sperm, that doesn't mean that the child is fatherless.
The child will have a father, maybe not the biological one, but a loving father nevertheless.

The child will have the heritage and ancestry of the legal father.
I agree that it will be not strictly biological, but it will work well enough for all moral/pride implications.

To don't mention those cultures where ancestry follow the maternal side (much more reliable from the biological point of view).

Where is the main issue is about medical history: to know the medical history of your biological parents can be in some cases be a critical piece of information.

The main reason why sperm donors can be anonimous is about paternity law to protect the donor (very few men would ever donate if there was a chance that they could have to pay child support) and the receiving family (nobody can claim tutelage over their child).