The B.C. Supreme Court has struck down provincial legislation that protected the identity of sperm donors. The court also prohibited the future destruction of any records and ordered the province to draw up new legislation in line with the Charter of Rights.
Lawyers for Olivia Pratten had argued that the existing rules discriminated against the children of sperm donors, and the court ruled in Olivia Pratten's favour on Thursday by striking down a section of the B.C. Adoption Act.
In the decision, Justice Elaine Adair wrote that the rights of the child must be protected in sperm donation, much like they are protected in cases of adoption in B.C.
The ruling gives the province 15 months to enact conforming changes to the B.C. Adoption Act that are in line with the Charter of Rights.
Adair found the Act was unconstitutional because it treats adopted children differently from children of sperm donors. Adopted children are provided information about their biological parents, whereas the children of donors are not.
TLDR: A Canadian apellate court has ruled that sperm donors have no right to anonymity, since that violated the rights of the children of sperm donors.
Most Canadian provinces have opened their adoption records out of concern for the rights of adopted children to know who their parents were (some however, like Ontario's, are opt-in -- meaning both the child and the parent must agree to identify themselves). This is the obvious next step, of course, since if adopted kids have the right to know why don't kids of donors?
Personally I'm torn, as I consider sperm donation more of an economic transaction than adoption. Jizz into the cup, get the money. Whether the jizz actual ever gets used by somebody is up to the company that has it, as well as the preferences of its customers.
But even though it is an economic transaction, it's one that carries with it the implicit possibility that you are creating a child. It's not surrogacy, definitely, but there is at least one step in the baby-making process involved (which is why they pay for the jizz in the first place).
My dad found out his heritage after Ontario's adoption records opened, and it brought him a lot of comfort. Is his situation substantially different than the child of jizz in a cup?
What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
On May 21 2011 03:08 Mikilatov wrote: What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
i can agree with this, but if it were me, i would want to find my biological father, entirely out of curiosity
On May 21 2011 03:08 Mikilatov wrote: What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
I agree, except this is more about the woman making sure that there's less chance of hereditary problems (im guessing....)
On May 21 2011 03:08 Mikilatov wrote: What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
What if your adoptive dad was a jerk or you had no dad at all? Perhaps they also have to live with a burden that they were at one point "unwanted" by their real parents and maybe want closure. I would imagine the people with great adoptive parents are just curious though.
On May 21 2011 03:08 Mikilatov wrote: What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
I agree. I don't really care for blood relations, despite being Asian (blood relations are pretty important in Chinese culture). Family is created through spending time with each other, caring, loving, living with each other, not by blood.
Speaking as an individual who was brought into the world this way (In-vitro Fertilization), I'd love to know who my biological father is, but unfortunately, this is going back over 26 years, long before the donor identities were able to be released.
On May 21 2011 03:08 Mikilatov wrote: What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
Dad's adoptive mom was a bitch, that's the primary factor in his case.
But he found out that the alternative was a 17-year-old aboriginal girl who beat him for the first three months of his life, so "bitch" is relative.
On May 21 2011 03:15 Anachromy wrote: Speaking as an individual who was brought into the world this way (In-vitro Fertilization), I'd love to know who my biological father is, but unfortunately, this is going back over 26 years, long before the donor identities were able to be released.
I may never know. but I try not to let it bug me.
That's pretty fascinating. I wish you would expand your thoughts on this.
On May 21 2011 03:08 Mikilatov wrote: What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
What if your adoptive dad was a jerk or you had no dad at all? Perhaps they also have to live with a burden that they were at one point "unwanted" by their real parents and maybe want closure. I would imagine the people with great adoptive parents are just curious though.
That's a good point, but I still don't think I'd personally be interested to know. And generally when I hear about people wanting to seek their real fathers out, they get really bent out of shape about it.
A cousin of mine recently (at age ~20) found out her dad isn't her real dad, and she prettymuch spiraled into drug use and a bunch of other negative stuff. Doesn't really make sense to me, as she's close to her 'father' and he raised her forever. The way I see it is he is her real dad, who cares what biology says.
I suppose I just don't personally quite get what the big deal is, but different strokes for different folks, I guess.
I feel that taking away anonymity is for the most part just going to result in significantly less donors. I admit this post is just speculation on my part, but I imagine that if the donors wanted to be a 'dad' they'd start their own family instead of anonymously donating. It's not to say I think the decision is wrong (so long as it only applies to future donors), but I do think they're damaging the service as opposed to seriously helping anyone.
I'm also not sure, beyond just meaningless curiousity, what the child would expect to gain from knowing who their biological father was that they should also be entitled to reasonably expect.
My concern about this is that you can jizz into a cup and then a decade later find yourself paying dearly for it if a child you never knew you had -- a child conceived without intercourse -- suddenly starts making demands. I understand that many children born this way might want to know just for the sake of knowing, as some form of closure or something, but this is potentially dangerous for the unknowing father.
This sounds like the right move if they absolve them of all the legal responsibilities an actual parent has. I'd say every kid wants to know whose blood he's carrying and passing on. No matter how you look at it that person is a pretty big part of who you are, especially if you're happy with your appearance and potential.
Lawyers for Olivia Pratten had argued that the existing rules discriminated against the children of sperm donors, and the court ruled in Olivia Pratten's favour on Thursday by striking down a section of the B.C. Adoption Act.
By the same logic sperm donors should pay child support as well. Which is absurd.
On May 21 2011 03:08 Mikilatov wrote: What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
There are a lot of things where knowing if there's a history of (whatever hereditary illness/medical issue) in the family is important. I'd personally want to know just for that alone. On everything else, I agree with you.
If the guy was donating for money, he clearly didn't want to cultivate a relationship with the potential tons of offspring it might generate...
edit: Oh, and if I were to ever consider donating, having my identity revealed would be a major obstacle to that. It would push me right back into the "I don't want to donate" side of the coin.
That's another thing... Would such legislation be retroactive? Does this mean that people who donated sperm thinking it was anonymous are now having these records revealed? That's pretty fucked up, if you ask me. If the legislation is going to change, the least they can do is at least make it only count for future donations, so those who donated under the promise of anonymity aren't hung out to dry.
i tried to find a youtubeclip but failed... you remember the simpsons episode where barney leaves the donation center and all children there "BURP" like he does? sure athletes and doctors, athletes and doctors xD...
On May 21 2011 03:37 Mikilatov wrote: That's another thing... Would such legislation be retroactive? Does this mean that people who donated sperm thinking it was anonymous are now having these records revealed? That's pretty fucked up, if you ask me. If the legislation is going to change, the least they can do is at least make it only count for future donations, so those who donated under the promise of anonymity aren't hung out to dry.
It's not legislation, it's a court decision. Sure, they had a contract, but it's unenforcable, because you can't sign away the child's right to know his biological parents.
You can argue that the right simply doesn't exist, but if it does a contract between two other persons won't change it.
I actually do this (long story how it came about, mostly my gf's idea) and the only real negative about it that I could think of was the potential of something like this happening in the future. As an anonymous donor, I can decide or not to respond to any inquiries about myself. The Cryobank I go to would act as a middleman for the initiating of any contact between myself and future kids.
I decided the benefits (cash in hand + helping out families in need) outweigh the small probability that someone sues (the right to which they give up when they accept services by the cryobank).
If anyone has any questions, I'd gladly answer them. This seems to be one of those things that people think "hell yeah i'd jerk off for money" but not many actually look into. There's a long process of genetic and blood testing and all that info is on your anonymous profile that the recipient looks at, so trying to get more info than what they already have would probably be unnecessary if you actually donate at a fully legit cryobank.
On May 21 2011 03:44 Miiike wrote: I actually do this (long story how it came about, mostly my gf's idea) and the only real negative about it that I could think of was the potential of something like this happening in the future. As an anonymous donor, I can decide or not to respond to any inquiries about myself. The Cryobank I go to would act as a middleman for the initiating of any contact between myself and future kids.
I decided the benefits (cash in hand + helping out families in need) outweigh the small probability that someone sues (the right to which they give up when they accept services by the cryobank).
If anyone has any questions, I'd gladly answer them. This seems to be one of those things that people think "hell yeah i'd jerk off for money" but not many actually look into. There's a long process of genetic and blood testing and all that info is on your anonymous profile that the recipient looks at, so trying to get more info than what they already have would probably be unnecessary if you actually donate at a fully legit cryobank.
How much do you make per load?
What do you think of the future "half yous" finding out who you are? Any plans on stopping donation if they take away anonymity?
On May 21 2011 03:44 Miiike wrote: I actually do this (long story how it came about, mostly my gf's idea) and the only real negative about it that I could think of was the potential of something like this happening in the future. As an anonymous donor, I can decide or not to respond to any inquiries about myself. The Cryobank I go to would act as a middleman for the initiating of any contact between myself and future kids.
I decided the benefits (cash in hand + helping out families in need) outweigh the small probability that someone sues (the right to which they give up when they accept services by the cryobank).
If anyone has any questions, I'd gladly answer them. This seems to be one of those things that people think "hell yeah i'd jerk off for money" but not many actually look into. There's a long process of genetic and blood testing and all that info is on your anonymous profile that the recipient looks at, so trying to get more info than what they already have would probably be unnecessary if you actually donate at a fully legit cryobank.
Sort of like blood donation? Are there rules like not being allowed to be a homosexual or have changed sex partner in the last 6 months (like there is in Sweded).
On May 21 2011 03:08 Mikilatov wrote: What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
There may be medical reasons to know, genetic history can be very important.
I completely see this as help for the unlucky couple, that can't have a child together. However, if it was unpaid it would just be bizarre. I jizz in a cup and deliver to a bank for fun.
Also; The guy delivering in a bank is only the biological father. He should have no attachments to either the bank nor the couple. He's only contributing.
On May 21 2011 03:47 NuKedUFirst wrote: How much do you make per load?
What do you think of the future "half yous" finding out who you are? Any plans on stopping donation if they take away anonymity?
I get $100 per donation.
After reviewing everything before becoming a qualified anonymous donor, any contact between myself and children is only allowed if I choose to do so, so I'm not worried about that happening. If I have a change of heart in the future, and in 18 years they ask the cryobank -- I can respond to them if I want.
If it wan't anonymous, I wouldn't do it.
In response to Eppa!: Yeah there were questions in screening (the very first part of the process) in regards to sexual history and partners. If I were to hypothetically start sleeping around (I'm in a relationship), I'd have tokeep them updated.
On May 21 2011 03:08 Mikilatov wrote: What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
There are a lot of things where knowing if there's a history of (whatever hereditary illness/medical issue) in the family is important. I'd personally want to know just for that alone. On everything else, I agree with you.
If the guy was donating for money, he clearly didn't want to cultivate a relationship with the potential tons of offspring it might generate...
edit: Oh, and if I were to ever consider donating, having my identity revealed would be a major obstacle to that. It would push me right back into the "I don't want to donate" side of the coin.
Why can't they just allow the biological parent to be called "John Doe" and just have his medical history revealed to the parents of the child that resulted from said donation?
I don't understand why they need to know the identity of the person, since all that really matters is medical history.
Other than curiosity and history of disease I don't see the point.
As for making a donation, I've thought about it and I'm not sure that I could do it. There's just something I don't like about the idea of giving away my top notch genetic material to strangers lol. It seems odd even to me that I feel this way because I tend to see everything as relatively meaningless. It's hard to explain, maybe it's selfishness or extreme overprotectiveness lol Idk. It just doesn't feel right. Until I thought about it for a while and realized I felt this way, my overall opinion was "Awesome! You can get paid to whack off? Count me in!" lol
I feel like sperm banks probably take a detailed history and perform a physical before taking any sperm. I'm not sure if they do... but it is definately something they should be doing...
On May 21 2011 04:32 Kenderson wrote: Other than curiosity and history of disease I don't see the point.
As for making a donation, I've thought about it and I'm not sure that I could do it. There's just something I don't like about the idea of giving away my top notch genetic material to strangers lol. It seems odd even to me that I feel this way because I tend to see everything as relatively meaningless. It's hard to explain, maybe it's selfishness or extreme overprotectiveness lol Idk. It just doesn't feel right. Until I thought about it for a while and realized I felt this way, my overall opinion was "Awesome! You can get paid to whack off? Count me in!" lol
That's the exact opposite of what top notch genetic material is.
On May 21 2011 04:33 DoomsVille wrote: I feel like sperm banks probably take a detailed history and perform a physical before taking any sperm. I'm not sure if they do... but it is definately something they should be doing...
The process takes months and involves physicals, information on every extended family member of yours (parents/siblings/grandparents/aunts and uncles/cousins), and even genetic testing. I actually have a printout of my karyotype at home from the process. I assure you that the recieving family has intimate knowledge of the donor they're choosing, at least in my experience.
On May 21 2011 03:37 Mikilatov wrote: That's another thing... Would such legislation be retroactive? Does this mean that people who donated sperm thinking it was anonymous are now having these records revealed? That's pretty fucked up, if you ask me. If the legislation is going to change, the least they can do is at least make it only count for future donations, so those who donated under the promise of anonymity aren't hung out to dry.
That's a good point. It has to be for future donations only. Without guaranteed anonymity I'm sure many of the donations wouldn't have been made in the first place.
Like my dad always said, "You can't change the rules in the middle of the game."
On May 21 2011 03:08 Mikilatov wrote: What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
i can agree with this, but if it were me, i would want to find my biological father, entirely out of curiosity
Yeah completely on the same boat here. I think it should be an opt in for both father and child though.
On May 21 2011 04:32 Kenderson wrote: Other than curiosity and history of disease I don't see the point.
As for making a donation, I've thought about it and I'm not sure that I could do it. There's just something I don't like about the idea of giving away my top notch genetic material to strangers lol. It seems odd even to me that I feel this way because I tend to see everything as relatively meaningless. It's hard to explain, maybe it's selfishness or extreme overprotectiveness lol Idk. It just doesn't feel right. Until I thought about it for a while and realized I felt this way, my overall opinion was "Awesome! You can get paid to whack off? Count me in!" lol
That's the exact opposite of what top notch genetic material is.
I don't think that was necessary, and you don't know me. I was joking about the top notch thing but only half joking. I wasn't gonna brag but you leave me no choice. I was identified as "gifted" at a young age, I'm a nerd and at the same time I excell in athletics, I'm tall and thin with fast metabolism and the majority of my family is very similar. So ya, top notch.
What if someone needs bone marrow or some other material from a family member? I don't think someone should suffer or die just because a promise of anonymity was once made.
On May 21 2011 04:54 Exogelatin wrote: What if someone needs bone marrow or some other material from a family member? I don't think someone should suffer or die just because a promise of anonymity was once made.
You make it seem like that's now an obligation to the donor and the donor's family.
This is so wrong, you have sperm donors because there are people or couples who just can't get pregnant via normal means and asking a friend to do it seems strange imo :3
You asked them to give sperm and they have to live with the thought of having a child somewhere and promised anonymity and didn't live up to it.
If you were guaranteed anonymity when you did it then breaking that is very very bad. Imagine anonymous crime tips where they reveal who the tipper was. This is in the same league, both can totally ruin the life of somebody that simply wanted to help out...
I can agree about anonymous donating becoming forbidden, the people involved then knows the deal. They would then know they might become responsible for the child in a worst case scenario (which they then can give up to the state if they want to).
I myself wouldn't try to find out my parent. But there seems to be a lot of people that value an unknown a lot...
On May 21 2011 03:37 Mikilatov wrote: That's another thing... Would such legislation be retroactive? Does this mean that people who donated sperm thinking it was anonymous are now having these records revealed? That's pretty fucked up, if you ask me. If the legislation is going to change, the least they can do is at least make it only count for future donations, so those who donated under the promise of anonymity aren't hung out to dry.
That's a good point. It has to be for future donations only. Without guaranteed anonymity I'm sure many of the donations wouldn't have been made in the first place.
Like my dad always said, "You can't change the rules in the middle of the game."
Agreed. They would have to be grandfathered in to the system as exceptions, so to speak. That would only be fair, from the sound of the original contract.
On May 21 2011 04:06 Miiike wrote: I get $100 per donation.
Holy shit... I've got a towel leaning against my desk at home that's worth probably a couple hundred thou.
Yeah it's a lot of money. I've signed up to donate at least once a week, which is what I usually do. If the gf isn't around for the week I try to get in two. You have to "abstain" for 48+ hours beforehand to ensure that there's enough vials to use. This means someone with no sex life and no jerking it could go as many as 3 times a week (mon/weds/fri) but that would be maximum.
There's also an overall limit as to how many times you can donate, the explanation of which takes a bit. Generally it's about a year and a half averaging 2 times a week, I think.
But yeah, 5k a year for 15 minutes a week is really good spending money. Also -- you should probably throw out that towel.
On May 21 2011 04:32 Kenderson wrote: Other than curiosity and history of disease I don't see the point.
As for making a donation, I've thought about it and I'm not sure that I could do it. There's just something I don't like about the idea of giving away my top notch genetic material to strangers lol. It seems odd even to me that I feel this way because I tend to see everything as relatively meaningless. It's hard to explain, maybe it's selfishness or extreme overprotectiveness lol Idk. It just doesn't feel right. Until I thought about it for a while and realized I felt this way, my overall opinion was "Awesome! You can get paid to whack off? Count me in!" lol
That's the exact opposite of what top notch genetic material is.
I don't think that was necessary, and you don't know me. I was joking about the top notch thing but only half joking. I wasn't gonna brag but you leave me no choice. I was identified as "gifted" at a young age, I'm a nerd and at the same time I excell in athletics, I'm tall and thin with fast metabolism and the majority of my family is very similar. So ya, top notch.
P.S. Don't be a dick.
I'm all of that AND I play as Protoss. People think my race is so imbalanced that they QQ non-stop on this forum about me.
I think a lot of the reason people want to know their biological parents is for health reasons. If you know you are at extra risk of heart disease or something, you can take more preventative action.
On May 21 2011 04:54 Exogelatin wrote: What if someone needs bone marrow or some other material from a family member? I don't think someone should suffer or die just because a promise of anonymity was once made.
You make it seem like that's now an obligation to the donor and the donor's family.
That's a different issue. Access to the information alone can be life or death.
On May 21 2011 04:32 Kenderson wrote: Other than curiosity and history of disease I don't see the point.
As for making a donation, I've thought about it and I'm not sure that I could do it. There's just something I don't like about the idea of giving away my top notch genetic material to strangers lol. It seems odd even to me that I feel this way because I tend to see everything as relatively meaningless. It's hard to explain, maybe it's selfishness or extreme overprotectiveness lol Idk. It just doesn't feel right. Until I thought about it for a while and realized I felt this way, my overall opinion was "Awesome! You can get paid to whack off? Count me in!" lol
That's the exact opposite of what top notch genetic material is.
I don't think that was necessary, and you don't know me. I was joking about the top notch thing but only half joking. I wasn't gonna brag but you leave me no choice. I was identified as "gifted" at a young age, I'm a nerd and at the same time I excell in athletics, I'm tall and thin with fast metabolism and the majority of my family is very similar. So ya, top notch.
P.S. Don't be a dick.
You sit in your room and post about jerking off on internet forums, top notch. Do you also excel at spelling? How tall is tall? How thin is thin? How much of your family is a majority? How fast is your metabolism? Do you realize that you're run-of-the-mill when it comes to the nerds that post on these forums?
I bet you knew that bragging is a popular mechanism for coping with insecurity. You posted this to let us know that people carrying top notch genetic material are usually insecure about it, right? Because we didn't realize how insecure people with the best genetic makeup are... especially when there's a discussion concerning genetic makeup.
Thank you for the information. Please feel free to continue updating us with more as you see fit.
Sperm donors have a right to anonymity as should be granted by the agreement under which they donate. Since when do children have the "right" to know who their biological parents are?
On May 21 2011 04:32 Kenderson wrote: Other than curiosity and history of disease I don't see the point.
As for making a donation, I've thought about it and I'm not sure that I could do it. There's just something I don't like about the idea of giving away my top notch genetic material to strangers lol. It seems odd even to me that I feel this way because I tend to see everything as relatively meaningless. It's hard to explain, maybe it's selfishness or extreme overprotectiveness lol Idk. It just doesn't feel right. Until I thought about it for a while and realized I felt this way, my overall opinion was "Awesome! You can get paid to whack off? Count me in!" lol
That's the exact opposite of what top notch genetic material is.
I don't think that was necessary, and you don't know me. I was joking about the top notch thing but only half joking. I wasn't gonna brag but you leave me no choice. I was identified as "gifted" at a young age, I'm a nerd and at the same time I excell in athletics, I'm tall and thin with fast metabolism and the majority of my family is very similar. So ya, top notch.
P.S. Don't be a dick.
I'm all of that AND I play as Protoss. People think my race is so imbalanced that they QQ non-stop on this forum about me.
I'm clearly far superior to you
You'd think so, but playing Protoss is like handicapping the opponent . Only the real superiors play Zerg, and still make their opponents QQ :D lol
On May 21 2011 04:32 Kenderson wrote: Other than curiosity and history of disease I don't see the point.
As for making a donation, I've thought about it and I'm not sure that I could do it. There's just something I don't like about the idea of giving away my top notch genetic material to strangers lol. It seems odd even to me that I feel this way because I tend to see everything as relatively meaningless. It's hard to explain, maybe it's selfishness or extreme overprotectiveness lol Idk. It just doesn't feel right. Until I thought about it for a while and realized I felt this way, my overall opinion was "Awesome! You can get paid to whack off? Count me in!" lol
That's the exact opposite of what top notch genetic material is.
I don't think that was necessary, and you don't know me. I was joking about the top notch thing but only half joking. I wasn't gonna brag but you leave me no choice. I was identified as "gifted" at a young age, I'm a nerd and at the same time I excell in athletics, I'm tall and thin with fast metabolism and the majority of my family is very similar. So ya, top notch.
P.S. Don't be a dick.
You sit in your room and post about jerking off on internet forums, top notch. Do you also excel at spelling? How tall is tall? How thin is thin? How much of your family is a majority? How fast is your metabolism? Do you realize that you're run-of-the-mill when it comes to the nerds that post on these forums?
I bet you knew that bragging is a popular mechanism for coping with insecurity. You posted this to let us know that people carrying top notch genetic material are usually insecure about it, right? Because we didn't realize how insecure people with the best genetic makeup are... especially when there's a discussion concerning genetic makeup.
Thank you for the information. Please feel free to continue updating us with more as you see fit.
Sperm donors have a right to anonymity as should be granted by the agreement under which they donate. Since when do children have the "right" to know who their biological parents are?
Wow I should have just kept my mouth shut I guess. I thought I was giving some insight into a unique view on sperm donation, but I guess jealousy prevails...
On May 21 2011 05:50 scorch- wrote: Sperm donors have a right to anonymity as should be granted by the agreement under which they donate. Since when do children have the "right" to know who their biological parents are?
Canada's courts have quite a notoriously broad definition of "rights".
That's a step forward in human progress. Maybe in about 5 decades people will be choosing their kids based on the intelligence of the non-anonymous donor. Then maybe 5 decades after that people start realizing it's better to use intelligent donors instead of normal conception. Then maybe after 2 centuries from now, we'll have a society with mostly smart people. With no wars, corruption or poverty
On May 21 2011 03:08 Mikilatov wrote: What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
I'm 18 and this is exactly what happened to me a few months ago. My parents were very relieved that I wasn't mad and didn't want to look up who my biological father was. I always forget that my Dad isn't my biological father because I don't really care. When I do remember, it does shock me a bit, just because it is such a different way of thinking.
I can see why this would make sense so that the child can be aware of any possibly dangerous medical history, but outside of that it seems rather pointless.
On May 21 2011 06:00 VIB wrote: That's a step forward in human progress. Maybe in about 5 decades people will be choosing their kids based on the intelligence of the non-anonymous donor. Then maybe 5 decades after that people start realizing it's better to use intelligent donors instead of normal conception. Then maybe after 2 centuries from now, we'll have a society with mostly smart people. With no wars, corruption or poverty
Considering that it's "smart" people who are doing all the corrupting and waging many of the wars, I'm not sure if your premise is entirely true. Just look at America as as prime example. Many of the greedy/corrupt businessmen, politicians, etc. all came from schools like Harvard, Princeton, etc. and are probably far more intelligent than most Americans.
On May 21 2011 03:08 Mikilatov wrote: What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
I'm 18 and this is exactly what happened to me a few months ago. My parents were very relieved that I wasn't mad and didn't want to look up who my biological father was. I always forget that my Dad isn't my biological father because I don't really care. When I do remember, it does shock me a bit, just because it is such a different way of thinking.
That's interesting to hear from someone who actually went through it recently. As I stated in the post you quoted, I feel I'd react the same exact way. I'm actually curious of how common this way of thinking is in comparison to the alternative.
On May 21 2011 06:35 Naio wrote: Considering that it's "smart" people who are doing all the corrupting and waging many of the wars, I'm not sure if your premise is entirely true. Just look at America as as prime example. Many of the greedy/corrupt businessmen, politicians, etc. all came from schools like Harvard, Princeton, etc. and are probably far more intelligent than most Americans.
I humbly disagree with your perception of intelligence
On May 21 2011 04:32 Kenderson wrote: Other than curiosity and history of disease I don't see the point.
As for making a donation, I've thought about it and I'm not sure that I could do it. There's just something I don't like about the idea of giving away my top notch genetic material to strangers lol. It seems odd even to me that I feel this way because I tend to see everything as relatively meaningless. It's hard to explain, maybe it's selfishness or extreme overprotectiveness lol Idk. It just doesn't feel right. Until I thought about it for a while and realized I felt this way, my overall opinion was "Awesome! You can get paid to whack off? Count me in!" lol
That's the exact opposite of what top notch genetic material is.
I don't think that was necessary, and you don't know me. I was joking about the top notch thing but only half joking. I wasn't gonna brag but you leave me no choice. I was identified as "gifted" at a young age, I'm a nerd and at the same time I excell in athletics, I'm tall and thin with fast metabolism and the majority of my family is very similar. So ya, top notch.
P.S. Don't be a dick.
Okay I would like to point something out, first he obviously did leave you a choice, you just chose the dick path.
Don't be a dick
Second you are "gifted" when you can't tell when you had a choice (or can't make an intelligent argument) and have to resort to bragging to strangers over the internet, and third from my experience people who are labeled as "gifted" as babies and then choose to brag about it generally turn out to be douche bags and not even close to smart.
You shouldn't have any legal obligations but as far as the info goes, I think they should keep records should the children request it but make it so that only they/the mother can view it.
On May 21 2011 03:08 Mikilatov wrote: What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
I think it's because people believe genetics play a huge role in how you turn out as a person. Therefore, you want to know who contributed to your genetic makeup.
I think this could potentially boil down to a nature vs. nurture type deal. Or in other words, why should the mother care who is the sperm donor, she has control of how the child will be raised. But then again, (Note: I have very little knowledge of the screening process of sperm donation) what if the donor has a pre-existing condition for heart disease or schizophrenia.
Basically the sperm donors are usually doing it simply to make some easy money, however, lets assume several years down the road they decide to have a child and that the child made from their "donated sperm" marries their child some crazy shit could happen (there have been cases of this).
I'm too lazy to find the article but apparently, people that are 50% alike are drawn closer (connect easier/more) to each other just because of human instinct (evolution you could argue) of being so similar genetically.
However, by curtailing anonymity also could lead to embarrassment for the sperm donor or possibly make them be frowned upon by society for "donating sperm" which, it is no one's fucking business except the child.
On May 21 2011 04:32 Kenderson wrote: Other than curiosity and history of disease I don't see the point.
As for making a donation, I've thought about it and I'm not sure that I could do it. There's just something I don't like about the idea of giving away my top notch genetic material to strangers lol. It seems odd even to me that I feel this way because I tend to see everything as relatively meaningless. It's hard to explain, maybe it's selfishness or extreme overprotectiveness lol Idk. It just doesn't feel right. Until I thought about it for a while and realized I felt this way, my overall opinion was "Awesome! You can get paid to whack off? Count me in!" lol
That's the exact opposite of what top notch genetic material is.
I don't think that was necessary, and you don't know me. I was joking about the top notch thing but only half joking. I wasn't gonna brag but you leave me no choice. I was identified as "gifted" at a young age, I'm a nerd and at the same time I excell in athletics, I'm tall and thin with fast metabolism and the majority of my family is very similar. So ya, top notch.
P.S. Don't be a dick.
Okay I would like to point something out, first he obviously did leave you a choice, you just chose the dick path.
Second you are "gifted" when you can't tell when you had a choice (or can't make an intelligent argument) and have to resort to bragging to strangers over the internet, and third from my experience people who are labeled as "gifted" as babies and then choose to brag about it generally turn out to be douche bags and not even close to smart.
Fuck ppl. You can't say anything on the internet these days without it being taken 100% literally and getting flamed for it. I wasn't trying to choose the dick path, I just felt obligated to give reasons for why I think I have good genes. How is presenting the evidence of my good genes not an intelligent argument? I really don't get why I'm getting flamed for this. I can't be the only one who thinks they have genes that are much better than average. If you think you're better than me and therefore I can't call my genes "top notch" then why can't you just be content with that instead of making condescending comments about a post that was by no means intended to offend in any way? The fuck do people have a problem with?
Also, the "dick path" is putting down people you don't know and generalizing negativity. If I get flamed anymore I'm just gonna stop responding. The people who commented so far on my first post just seem angry and I don't know why.
On May 21 2011 07:15 BroboCop wrote: it is a double edged sword.
Basically the sperm donors are usually doing it simply to make some easy money, however, lets assume several years down the road they decide to have a child and that the child made from their "donated sperm" marries their child some crazy shit could happen (there have been cases of this).
I'm too lazy to find the article but apparently, people that are 50% alike are drawn closer (connect easier/more) to each other just because of human instinct (evolution you could argue) of being so similar genetically.
However, by curtailing anonymity also could lead to embarrassment for the sperm donor or possibly make them be frowned upon by society for "donating sperm" which, it is no one's fucking business except the child.
I don't think this is true I remember reading an article about hormones that are released that prevented people who are to close genetically from being attracted to eachother. This is how in the early stages of the human evolution we prevented inbreeding.
Some parents cant have children and some people are awesome people and that they will jizz in a cup just to give someone children. I think they should have the right to whether the bank can give the persons information or not.
On May 21 2011 04:32 Kenderson wrote: Other than curiosity and history of disease I don't see the point.
As for making a donation, I've thought about it and I'm not sure that I could do it. There's just something I don't like about the idea of giving away my top notch genetic material to strangers lol. It seems odd even to me that I feel this way because I tend to see everything as relatively meaningless. It's hard to explain, maybe it's selfishness or extreme overprotectiveness lol Idk. It just doesn't feel right. Until I thought about it for a while and realized I felt this way, my overall opinion was "Awesome! You can get paid to whack off? Count me in!" lol
That's the exact opposite of what top notch genetic material is.
I don't think that was necessary, and you don't know me. I was joking about the top notch thing but only half joking. I wasn't gonna brag but you leave me no choice. I was identified as "gifted" at a young age, I'm a nerd and at the same time I excell in athletics, I'm tall and thin with fast metabolism and the majority of my family is very similar. So ya, top notch.
P.S. Don't be a dick.
Okay I would like to point something out, first he obviously did leave you a choice, you just chose the dick path.
Don't be a dick
Second you are "gifted" when you can't tell when you had a choice (or can't make an intelligent argument) and have to resort to bragging to strangers over the internet, and third from my experience people who are labeled as "gifted" as babies and then choose to brag about it generally turn out to be douche bags and not even close to smart.
Fuck ppl. You can't say anything on the internet these days without it being taken 100% literally and getting flamed for it. I wasn't trying to choose the dick path, I just felt obligated to give reasons for why I think I have good genes. How is presenting the evidence of my good genes not an intelligent argument? I really don't get why I'm getting flamed for this. I can't be the only one who thinks they have genes that are much better than average. If you think you're better than me and therefore I can't call my genes "top notch" then why can't you just be content with that instead of making condescending comments about a post that was by no means intended to offend in any way? The fuck do people have a problem with?
Also, the "dick path" is putting down people you don't know and generalizing negativity. If I get flamed anymore I'm just gonna stop responding. The people who commented so far on my first post just seem angry and I don't know why.
The kids in high school used to complain about classes, and argue over which class was the hardest. I hated that I thought they were all easy because everytime I tried to argue with them, I lost. I hated losing arguments because I thought I was the smartest kid in school. I thought I was so smart that people would want me working for them, creating their new shit and solving their problems. Turns out I'm just some nerd posting on TL. You're not top notch genes. I'm not top notch genes. We're nothing in the gigantic ocean of humanity. Being an adult means recognizing who you are and having some level of respect for the people around you and just how big the world is. Relax, take a deep breath and then accept the lesson.
do they test you for genetic competency before you can become a donor? how stringent is the rules? like if i have a deformed spine will they only sell my sperm to tramps
On May 21 2011 04:32 Kenderson wrote: Other than curiosity and history of disease I don't see the point.
As for making a donation, I've thought about it and I'm not sure that I could do it. There's just something I don't like about the idea of giving away my top notch genetic material to strangers lol. It seems odd even to me that I feel this way because I tend to see everything as relatively meaningless. It's hard to explain, maybe it's selfishness or extreme overprotectiveness lol Idk. It just doesn't feel right. Until I thought about it for a while and realized I felt this way, my overall opinion was "Awesome! You can get paid to whack off? Count me in!" lol
That's the exact opposite of what top notch genetic material is.
I don't think that was necessary, and you don't know me. I was joking about the top notch thing but only half joking. I wasn't gonna brag but you leave me no choice. I was identified as "gifted" at a young age, I'm a nerd and at the same time I excell in athletics, I'm tall and thin with fast metabolism and the majority of my family is very similar. So ya, top notch.
P.S. Don't be a dick.
Okay I would like to point something out, first he obviously did leave you a choice, you just chose the dick path.
Don't be a dick
Second you are "gifted" when you can't tell when you had a choice (or can't make an intelligent argument) and have to resort to bragging to strangers over the internet, and third from my experience people who are labeled as "gifted" as babies and then choose to brag about it generally turn out to be douche bags and not even close to smart.
Fuck ppl. You can't say anything on the internet these days without it being taken 100% literally and getting flamed for it. I wasn't trying to choose the dick path, I just felt obligated to give reasons for why I think I have good genes. How is presenting the evidence of my good genes not an intelligent argument? I really don't get why I'm getting flamed for this. I can't be the only one who thinks they have genes that are much better than average. If you think you're better than me and therefore I can't call my genes "top notch" then why can't you just be content with that instead of making condescending comments about a post that was by no means intended to offend in any way? The fuck do people have a problem with?
Also, the "dick path" is putting down people you don't know and generalizing negativity. If I get flamed anymore I'm just gonna stop responding. The people who commented so far on my first post just seem angry and I don't know why.
The biggest problem I see is that you appear to have overreacted to and misinterpreted DoomsVille's statement. I'm pretty sure he was just saying that, in an evolutionary sense, genes which refuse to propagate themselves - as you did when you said you did not want to "give them away" - are by definition bad/unsuccessful genes. It was a snarky (and clever) comeback, but not really an insult. I do not think he was calling you dumb, ugly, etc. Of course, even if he had, posing about how smart and good looking you are on the internet is bound to elicit the kinds of comments you got.
I don't terribly care about whether sperm donors get anonymity or not- what I find unforgivable is to be promised anonimity, and then after you donate, have your anonimity taken away. In some countries, that could lead you to be forced to make monthly child welfare payments, court appearances, and all kinds of shit you didn't sign up for, AFAIK.
So if you want to give the donors anonimity, great. If you don't want to give the donors anonimity, that's fine too.
But make sure you're consistent with what you promise and what you deliver. Otherwise, you just leave a big mess where the donors get to pick up the broken plates.
On May 21 2011 03:08 Mikilatov wrote: What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
lol.....words cannot describe how ignorant this makes you sound.
On May 21 2011 03:08 Mikilatov wrote: What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
lol.....words cannot describe how ignorant this makes you sound.
If you think so, could you please share your apparently non-ignorant point of view to enlighten the rest of us? I mean, to make this more than just a snide comment?
1. Child knowing for medical reasons 2. making sure as a female sure you don't hook up with your biological dad. (still possible to hook up with your biological half-brother/sister though)
This is pretty bullshit tbh. I dunno about the US, but in the UK there is a shortage of donors (since it is illegal to receive a gratuity apart from travel expenses... so the hassle isn't worth it).
its arguably a human rights infringement to not protect the biological father's identity. its not like most people just donate once and thats it, what if you donate like 10 times and end up having to have awkward, pointless meetings at a café on 10 seperate occasions
I also don't see why people give a shit about their lineage. Unless you are a royal or something, you shouldn't care at all...
On May 21 2011 03:08 Mikilatov wrote: What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
lol.....words cannot describe how ignorant this makes you sound.
If you think so, could you please share your apparently non-ignorant point of view to enlighten the rest of us? I mean, to make this more than just a snide comment?
Yeah I don't get it. It was simply expressed how the subject would be viewed personally, how can that possibly be ignorant?
On May 21 2011 10:20 Maliris wrote: This is pretty bullshit tbh. I dunno about the US, but in the UK there is a shortage of donors (since it is illegal to receive a gratuity apart from travel expenses... so the hassle isn't worth it).
its arguably a human rights infringement to not protect the biological father's identity. its not like most people just donate once and thats it, what if you donate like 10 times and end up having to have awkward, pointless meetings at a café on 10 seperate occasions
I also don't see why people give a shit about their lineage. Unless you are a royal or something, you shouldn't care at all...
Possibly because incest is illegal and results in a higher rate of birth defects than a normal child. It's fine if the children of IVF never have any kids of their own, but it seems like a pain to me to have to get a DNA test every time you want to get into a relationship just because you might be committing incest without even knowing it. There have been court cases of couples separated because they were found to be related but didn't know it because of IVF/adoption and they were never told about it. I'm sure someone is going to make a comment about how love transcends all, but realistically there are things that are illegal and it's just better not to ruin someone's life because of it.
Yikes if the USA decided to deny anonymity to sperm donors then I'd completely rule myself out as a donor. Good thing sperm isn't on short supply like blood and bone marrow are (I assume).
On May 21 2011 03:08 Mikilatov wrote: What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
On May 21 2011 03:08 Mikilatov wrote: What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
On May 21 2011 03:08 Mikilatov wrote: What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
what if the doner is a nigger.
I think that the more important question to ask would be "what if the donor was Stroggoz?"
this is weird... and i also thought that it's the donor's right to have anonymity. and too bad for the father, may be some guys just want to earn extra income for donating sperm but bam! after few years, a child would want to meet him... on second thought, that's the risk he should take in donating fluids. makes me wonder, would this be effective retrospectively or would only apply to all new sperm donors (after the court ruling)?
As an IVF kid myself, I am strongly against the IVF method.
When I learnt about it, I felt like I was just some byproduct of science. And I still do.
We don't even understand a tenth of what makes us "choose" a partner, but it is heavily chemical, both parents respond to eachother in ways science can't even fathom. Yet we think we know better than mother nature and determine who can or cannot sell their seed by some physical / mental tests that are completely irrelevant.
Some people already tried to play with that, and it was the Nazis doing eugenics, but guess what ?
It does not work ! Recessive genes and such play a huge role, and if one can never predict the outcome, at least nature has much better ways than us to deal with all the troubles that might occur.
By bypassing the whole natural process of mating, IVF creates abnormalities like me. Some of us may be fine with it, surrounded in a right environement, but most of people like me I know share the same opinion as mine.
The donor's identity should be available for health reasons as aforementionned, and imo the whole IVF service should not be allowed.
If unfertile couples want a child, theres adoption.
If past donators expected anonymity, then opening the records to them is wrong. They may have to deal with stuff they didn't sign up for. Opening the records for donators donating past this point is ok, as long as they're donating knowing that they can be looked up by possible future kids.
On May 21 2011 03:08 Mikilatov wrote: What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
what if the doner is a nigger.
User was temp banned for this post.
Why hate?
What if your dad was really Curtis Jackson...? Shot 9 times and still alive...
On May 21 2011 03:20 EnOmy wrote: Tough. The child does have a right to know but you're right when you say sperm donation is more of a financial transaction then anything else
Assuming they donated on the condition of anonymity, this is a pretty huge betrayal, and honestly I could not give any less of a fuck about the 'childs right to know' - his biological father had NOTHING to do with his upbringing.
On May 21 2011 03:20 EnOmy wrote: Tough. The child does have a right to know but you're right when you say sperm donation is more of a financial transaction then anything else
Assuming they donated on the condition of anonymity, this is a pretty huge betrayal, and honestly I could not give any less of a fuck about the 'childs right to know' - his biological father had NOTHING to do with his upbringing.
Wow you're awesome even when you're not owning at starcraft :D
jk I already knew that <3
EDIT: But yes I see no need for the child to know, the biological father's role ends with the donation and there is no need for the child to know other than curiosity (or aforementioned genetics).
On May 21 2011 03:56 Roeder wrote: I completely see this as help for the unlucky couple, that can't have a child together. However, if it was unpaid it would just be bizarre. I jizz in a cup and deliver to a bank for fun.
Well , it's unpaid in Australia. And you have to register your name , adress and other details so your child can contact you when they turn 18. Of course , now these clinics are having to import sperm from overseas because no man in their right mind would donate.
On May 21 2011 22:43 Catch]22 wrote: Wasnt there a legal case in which the sperm donor was forced to pay child support a few years back?
And whatever happened to patient-doctor confidentiality? Or could anyone just open a sperm bank and peform fertilizations?
That was a lesbian couple where one of them inseminated privately with an acquaintance' sperm. Later after the couple had separated the mother demanded child support from the father and got it of course. Being stupid does not make you free from legal obligations.
On May 21 2011 22:43 Catch]22 wrote: Wasnt there a legal case in which the sperm donor was forced to pay child support a few years back?
And whatever happened to patient-doctor confidentiality? Or could anyone just open a sperm bank and peform fertilizations?
That was a lesbian couple where one of them inseminated privately with an acquaintance' sperm. Later after the couple had separated the mother demanded child support from the father and got it of course. Being stupid does not make you free from legal obligations.
Men need a rights movement , like feminism but for men.
"The Appeal Court ruled there is no legal right for offspring to know their past and providing such information would amount to state intrusion into many people's lives."
It ain't over yet, though, our intrepid hero still has the Canadian Supreme Court to take her fight to. Look how bummed out she is that she doesn't know who her biodad is:
On November 29 2012 01:06 Tommie wrote: Women will only use this as an excuse for alimony. Basically once you have a baby you're set.
The misogyny is uncalled for. All that's needed to protect the donor is an addendum to the bill saying that the biological father is considered to have no responsibility for the child, and as such is treated as a complete stranger in any legal cases that may arise.
I'm thinking that they are right with this. I didn't read the article, I just read the TLDR. If they were to implement this, would it only effect the sperm donors from now on, or are past donors forced to give up their anonymity.
I personally think that since the children can't obviously have a say, it should be up to the sperm donors whether or not they are going to donate. If they don't want to be found out by a kid in the future... then don't do it. As simple as that.
I do think it's fair enough if the sperm donor gets some kind of legal security that protects him in the future.
On November 29 2012 01:06 Tommie wrote: Women will only use this as an excuse for alimony. Basically once you have a baby you're set.
I always find these sorts of remarks a bit ... insensitive because it's not limited to women and it is INCREDIBLY situational. You have no idea the circumstances that child was conceived under. Not all women who conceived through a donation are going to suddenly jump up and go 'YES FREE MONEY' if it passes.
When my parents divorced it was my dad who took custody of my sister and looked after her - my mother was too busy off enjoying her new life. My dad had so much problems with getting child support out of my mother. This is a gender reversal of the 'usual' situation where the parent 'saddled' with the children is the mother and they have to hassle the father for money which is what you NORMALLY hear. So I don't think we should tar all of a gender with the same brush of stereotypes when it comes to parenting.
Cuckholding has been around forever. There are people who believe they are the REAL father, rearing a child from an unfaithful woman. There are estimates around 20% of children in a "happy marriage" are really from another guy via affair.
IN olden days, guys would sometimes cuckhold their wives, so they would have a child. Sperm donation is no different, and if people understood that, they'd stop going "where'd the cum come from!?".
On November 29 2012 01:06 Tommie wrote: Women will only use this as an excuse for alimony. Basically once you have a baby you're set.
The misogyny is uncalled for. All that's needed to protect the donor is an addendum to the bill saying that the biological father is considered to have no responsibility for the child, and as such is treated as a complete stranger in any legal cases that may arise.
60% of divorces are initiated by women. Women cheat and see nothing wrong with it, as long as their husbands dont find out, because they dont want to lose their station in life and "hurt their man with the knowledge".
I was clear from the start that I'd never leave my husband and family. Brian kept me sane during some of the tougher years of my marriage, but he was strictly for snatched afternoons off and the odd "working weekend" away,' she says.
Susan adds: 'We made each other laugh and our sex life was wonderful. But Brian was a permanent "man-child" - a great lover, but not the kind of man you'd marry.
'He was always overdrawn, always teetering on the edge of some crisis that he'd just laugh off. I never wanted to live with him.'
The affair ended amicably after eight years, with her husband none the wiser.
Cheating is never pretty, but lying about it doesn't necessarily make it worse. Often, our lies are meant to shield our partners and families from pain. We tell ourselves that if nobody knows, nobody gets hurt.
Dr Holmes says: 'Often, women keep the secret because they're much more conscious of how much there is to lose, and to protect the other people involved. If she has children, she'll be especially careful that they aren't hurt in any way by the knowledge of what she's doing.' If you asked unfaithful men if they think their wives or girlfriends have had affairs, too, they will be shocked at the very thought
Like my friend Juliet, who has become so good at lying to her husband that she surprises even herself.
'Adrian and I have drifted apart, but he's a nice man, a good father. He doesn't deserve to be hurt, and I have no intention of letting my son grow up without his father.'
Biologically, too, women are programmed to be more careful about revealing an infidelity.
In purely evolutionary terms, men are programmed to sleep with lots of women, and women are programmed to attract and retain a quality mate.
Dr Holmes adds: 'She will be very canny and keep her options open until she decides which of the men she is going to choose.'
never that it's wrong, Or perhaps that it's wrong and she knows it and just doesn't care but to sate her appetite. You're naive if you think otherwise. I mean, did you miss that post about two lesbians abusing a man's trust for profit? Doesnt this "cheating wife" also look like someone who's trying to get her cake and eat it too, with deceit instead of honesty? Knowing her kids would call her a slut, and doing it anyway? Is she wrong for that behavior, or will you defend her as exploring her sexual needs? let's see that answer.
remember, she has the husband for money and a home, and the guy for sex for YEARS, in contrast to the entire point of marriage vows, legal AND religious, if she be a christian.
Both genders are capable of being just as horrible as each other. Both are capable of cheating. Both are capable of leaving kids. Both are capable of taking the other through hell and back in a court of law. One or two examples of either being a jerk in a situation does not mean you have to tar the entire gender with the same brush so please stop posting that all women are evil and are just out to take men for all they are worth. There are plenty of instances of men doing this to women, but I do not assume all guys are going to beat me up and make me financially dependant on them.
Also please do not link to the Daily Mail as a reputable news source - it is entirely the opposite. It is a tabloid, sensasionalist gossip.
On November 29 2012 18:29 DameHixxi wrote: Both genders are capable of being just as horrible as each other. Both are capable of cheating. Both are capable of leaving kids. Both are capable of taking the other through hell and back in a court of law. One or two examples of either being a jerk in a situation does not mean you have to tar the entire gender with the same brush so please stop posting that all women are evil and are just out to take men for all they are worth. There are plenty of instances of men doing this to women, but I do not assume all guys are going to beat me up and make me financially dependant on them.
Also please do not link to the Daily Mail as a reputable news source - it is entirely the opposite. It is a tabloid, sensasionalist gossip.
But only ONE side can profit from divorce. Apparently you don't know that pop culture tells us all men deserve mistreatment and suffering, and to be used. Women on the view laughing at male genital mutilation from a wife who poisoned her husband to subdue him first. legions of TV shows where men are fat, bumbling, idiots who need a smart sexy wife to save their asses continually, etc. Do your own research before you think men as a sex, not gender (gender is mental construct of sexual self, which is why people get "sex changes"), aren't broadly brushed by our culture.
On November 29 2012 18:29 DameHixxi wrote: Both genders are capable of being just as horrible as each other. Both are capable of cheating. Both are capable of leaving kids. Both are capable of taking the other through hell and back in a court of law. One or two examples of either being a jerk in a situation does not mean you have to tar the entire gender with the same brush so please stop posting that all women are evil and are just out to take men for all they are worth. There are plenty of instances of men doing this to women, but I do not assume all guys are going to beat me up and make me financially dependant on them.
Also please do not link to the Daily Mail as a reputable news source - it is entirely the opposite. It is a tabloid, sensasionalist gossip.
But only ONE side can profit from divorce.
This is absolutely not true. My father and mother actually reversed who paid child support at times pending court decision, and this sort of thing happens all the time during long custody battles.
When my parents divorced my dad got the house, kids and money. My mother was the one who left. She used her own personal savings to get her own place, buy her own furniture and live her own life.
So no, not in every case. This is why generalisations based on gender are bad.
Edit: You edited your post so I shall edit mine.
But only ONE side can profit from divorce. Apparently you don't know that pop culture tells us all men deserve mistreatment and suffering, and to be used. Women on the view laughing at male genital mutilation from a wife who poisoned her husband to subdue him first. legions of TV shows where men are fat, bumbling, idiots who need a smart sexy wife to save their asses continually, etc. Do your own research before you think men as a sex, not gender (gender is mental construct of sexual self, which is why people get "sex changes"), aren't broadly brushed by our culture.
Pop culture tells both men and women a lot of horrible things about themselves. There are plenty of shows and games and movies that throw both genders into awful stereotypes but I would like to think that people on TL know better than to buy into them. If you are upset by male stereotyping and know that it is wrong in mainstream media, did you ever think that perhaps the mainstream media also does exactly the same to women in articles like the one you linked?
We're not all horrid ladies seeking out men like missiles to impregnate us for the sole purpose of popping up nine months later going 'GOTCHA WALLET HAHA FOOLISH MAN'.
Also I never said 'sex'. I used the word gender. So I am not sure what you mean by that last statement.
On November 29 2012 18:34 DameHixxi wrote: When my parents divorced my dad got the house, kids and money. My mother was the one who left. She used her own personal savings to get her own place, buy her own furniture and live her own life.
So no, not in every case. This is why generalisations based on gender are bad.
Yes, the beauty of Pre-nups or states or countries where they can't take you for everything. You know in California, a woman can co-habit with a man for seven years, and once that minimum is reached, it doesn't matter if theyre married or not, she can legally demand alimony.
On November 29 2012 18:29 DameHixxi wrote: Both genders are capable of being just as horrible as each other. Both are capable of cheating. Both are capable of leaving kids. Both are capable of taking the other through hell and back in a court of law. One or two examples of either being a jerk in a situation does not mean you have to tar the entire gender with the same brush so please stop posting that all women are evil and are just out to take men for all they are worth. There are plenty of instances of men doing this to women, but I do not assume all guys are going to beat me up and make me financially dependant on them.
Also please do not link to the Daily Mail as a reputable news source - it is entirely the opposite. It is a tabloid, sensasionalist gossip.
But only ONE side can profit from divorce.
This is absolutely not true. My father and mother actually reversed who paid child support at times pending court decision, and this sort of thing happens all the time during long custody battles.
She was ultimately the one to profit, however. You say it was reversed occasionally, but it was a long custody battle, meaning she didn't want the process to stop.
On November 29 2012 18:34 DameHixxi wrote: When my parents divorced my dad got the house, kids and money. My mother was the one who left. She used her own personal savings to get her own place, buy her own furniture and live her own life.
So no, not in every case. This is why generalisations based on gender are bad.
Yes, the beauty of Pre-nups or states or countries where they can't take you for everything. You know in California, a woman can co-habit with a man for seven years, and once that minimum is reached, it doesn't matter if theyre married or not, she can legally demand alimony.
On November 29 2012 18:29 DameHixxi wrote: Both genders are capable of being just as horrible as each other. Both are capable of cheating. Both are capable of leaving kids. Both are capable of taking the other through hell and back in a court of law. One or two examples of either being a jerk in a situation does not mean you have to tar the entire gender with the same brush so please stop posting that all women are evil and are just out to take men for all they are worth. There are plenty of instances of men doing this to women, but I do not assume all guys are going to beat me up and make me financially dependant on them.
Also please do not link to the Daily Mail as a reputable news source - it is entirely the opposite. It is a tabloid, sensasionalist gossip.
But only ONE side can profit from divorce.
This is absolutely not true. My father and mother actually reversed who paid child support at times pending court decision, and this sort of thing happens all the time during long custody battles.
She was ultimately the one to profit, however. You say it was reversed occasionally, but it was a long custody battle, meaning she didn't want the process to stop.
LOL no not even close. In fact, my father at one point was making over 300k a year and yet had somehow gotten my mom forced to pay him child support. Don't presume to tell me the course of my own life in order to prove some inane point.
On November 29 2012 18:37 Arighttomorals wrote: Yes, the beauty of Pre-nups or states or countries where they can't take you for everything. You know in California, a woman can co-habit with a man for seven years, and once that minimum is reached, it doesn't matter if theyre married or not, she can legally demand alimony.
If a woman co-habits with a man for seven years then yes I would say she is entitled to part of the estate she lived in and contributed to for nearly a decade, and I would say the same for a man as well because he helped too!
On November 29 2012 18:31 Arighttomorals wrote:
She was ultimately the one to profit, however. You say it was reversed occasionally, but it was a long custody battle, meaning she didn't want the process to stop.
My mother never contested custody of my sister. What she did contest was paying child support for her - a situation usually done by the father if you believe all the statistics. But thank you for assuming you know more about my family life than me.
On November 29 2012 18:32 farvacola wrote: LOL no not even close. In fact, my father at one point was making over 300k a year and yet had somehow gotten my mom forced to pay him child support. Don't presume to tell me the course of my own life in order to prove some inane point.
This. My father earned more than my mother too. So now you have two examples where what 'the news' would have you believe is false.
On November 29 2012 18:34 DameHixxi wrote: When my parents divorced my dad got the house, kids and money. My mother was the one who left. She used her own personal savings to get her own place, buy her own furniture and live her own life.
So no, not in every case. This is why generalisations based on gender are bad.
Yes, the beauty of Pre-nups or states or countries where they can't take you for everything. You know in California, a woman can co-habit with a man for seven years, and once that minimum is reached, it doesn't matter if theyre married or not, she can legally demand alimony.
On November 29 2012 18:32 farvacola wrote:
On November 29 2012 18:31 Arighttomorals wrote:
On November 29 2012 18:29 DameHixxi wrote: Both genders are capable of being just as horrible as each other. Both are capable of cheating. Both are capable of leaving kids. Both are capable of taking the other through hell and back in a court of law. One or two examples of either being a jerk in a situation does not mean you have to tar the entire gender with the same brush so please stop posting that all women are evil and are just out to take men for all they are worth. There are plenty of instances of men doing this to women, but I do not assume all guys are going to beat me up and make me financially dependant on them.
Also please do not link to the Daily Mail as a reputable news source - it is entirely the opposite. It is a tabloid, sensasionalist gossip.
But only ONE side can profit from divorce.
This is absolutely not true. My father and mother actually reversed who paid child support at times pending court decision, and this sort of thing happens all the time during long custody battles.
She was ultimately the one to profit, however. You say it was reversed occasionally, but it was a long custody battle, meaning she didn't want the process to stop.
LOL no not even close. In fact, my father at one point was making over 300k a year and yet had somehow gotten my mom forced to pay him child support. Don't presume to tell me the course of my own life in order to prove some inane point.
On November 29 2012 18:37 Arighttomorals wrote: Yes, the beauty of Pre-nups or states or countries where they can't take you for everything. You know in California, a woman can co-habit with a man for seven years, and once that minimum is reached, it doesn't matter if theyre married or not, she can legally demand alimony.
If a woman co-habits with a man for seven years then yes I would say she is entitled to part of the estate she lived in and contributed to for nearly a decade, and I would say the same for a man as well because he helped too!
She was ultimately the one to profit, however. You say it was reversed occasionally, but it was a long custody battle, meaning she didn't want the process to stop.
My mother never contested custody of my sister. What she did contest was paying child support for her - a situation usually done by the father if you believe all the statistics. But thank you for assuming you know more about my family life than me.
On November 29 2012 18:32 farvacola wrote: LOL no not even close. In fact, my father at one point was making over 300k a year and yet had somehow gotten my mom forced to pay him child support. Don't presume to tell me the course of my own life in order to prove some inane point.
This. My father earned more than my mother too. So now you have two examples where what 'the news' would have you believe is false.
Oh? even if she sat around making no money and watching soaps all day?
Also, United Kingdom. Not even the same as the U.S. But thanks for assuming your laws and culture is what everyone else uses.
Yes. Even if she sat around making no money and watching soaps all day because you cannot say this is the sum of the situation. Perhaps she has crippling anxiety health issues and cannot leave the house? Perhaps her partner is happy to help her and perhaps they are wealthy enough to hire a housekeeper so she can have this life. If I was earning so much money that my partner could stay at home and watch soaps all day he is more than welcome to! Because I love him and I want him to have the best life.
I am not assuming the laws of my country are the same everywhere, what I am saying is that no matter where we are we shouldn't say 'all women are evil whores who are out to steal mens money and pop out babies for this sole purpose' just like we shouldn't say things like 'men are players who are just out to use women for fun sexy times' or a million other stereotypes the media would have us feed into.
On November 29 2012 18:54 DameHixxi wrote: Yes. Even if she sat around making no money and watching soaps all day because you cannot say this is the sum of the situation. Perhaps she has crippling anxiety health issues and cannot leave the house? Perhaps her partner is happy to help her and perhaps they are wealthy enough to hire a housekeeper so she can have this life. If I was earning so much money that my partner could stay at home and watch soaps all day he is more than welcome to! Because I love him and I want him to have the best life.
I am not assuming the laws of my country are the same everywhere, what I am saying is that no matter where we are we shouldn't say 'all women are evil whores who are out to steal mens money and pop out babies for this sole purpose' just like we shouldn't say things like 'men are players who are just out to use women for fun sexy times' or a million other stereotypes the media would have us feed into.
I love how you're always in defense of the woman. Keep adding the hypoagency. Would you say the same for a man? People would scorn a male acting like that. Even Nietzsche said the same thing.
And too bad for us, The media tailors itself to the largest population, which is females. They already control many of the markets with their shopping habits by spending 3 times the average male annually. google it.
Let's get back on topic, if you can manage that. This would create a legal vulnerability, and it won't make any difference in the lives of those people who are all grown up without their biological parents. Case closed.
I am not entirely sure that you are reading my posts properly because you say 'would you say the same for a man?' when ... I have said this exact thing nearly every post I have made. People scorn both men and women for acting certain ways when the whole point of what I have been saying is 'we cannot judge someone by stereotypes set by gender'.
I think you should look up some statistics on sexism. There is a large men's rights movement as well as a female right's movement and both have issues that require solving but neither one is more 'right' or 'wrong' than the other. Women enjoy shopping, so what? Men comprise the majority of the gaming community, but does that mean we should put up with sexy, objectifying photos of ladies display gaming keyboards on their butts? Swings and roundabouts. It goes both ways.
Women are not out to take over with their evil shopping sprees and love of fluffy soap operas. Men are not rabid animals who cannot control themselves around a half naked woman.
On May 21 2011 03:08 Mikilatov wrote: What I've never understood is why people seem to care who their biological parents are?
If I found out my father wasn't my real father, I'd say "No, he's my real father, because he raised me and took care of me and still cares for me to this day." Who the hell cares where the sperm came from. There's a difference between a sperm donor and a DAD.
I guess maybe I'd have to be put in that position to understand, but honestly, I don't think I'd give two shits if I didn't know my 'biological' father, if he was just a random sperm donor.
Family history of diseases is always good to know.
When you don't take the standard procedure billions of women before you have taken in finding a male with halfway decent genetics to impregnate you with of course you are going to take risks.
I agree that sperm donors shouldn't have anonymity at least in regard to hereditary diseases, but damn women shouldn't be so lazy when it comes to finding suitable genetics, put some effort in yo.
I believe in Australia there is a massive shortage of donors and they import sperm from overseas. Once you get rid of buyer anonimity then donor numbers fall off a cliff, similarly here there is no financial reward for donating sperm so really there is no reason to donate sperm.Several stories of men who have donated sperm for gay female couples to have kids, the women split up and the carer of the child takes the donor to court to make him pay child support.It is no wonder men are scared off, the system is very much against them.
i think it would be nice if anonymity was waived JUST for the child. So if the child grew up and wanted to meet his/her father, he/she could have a phone number to call and say "hi i'm your biological kid and would like to meet you just for my own curiosity, would you be interested?" whereby the dad can then say "thanks but no thanks have a nice life kiddo" and have that be the end of it, or maybe they have coffee and find out they share weird traits and have a good ol time. As for the mum, i dont see why she needs this information.
i wouldn't go so far as to say that there is a right for every child to meet their bio parents, but i just think its something nice the corporation can do for the kids, since they have that information anyways. And the kid discovers his/her bio dad is a huge dick, then its like "thank GOD i wasn't parented by that meatbag, i love you so much more mum/dad."
On November 29 2012 19:05 DameHixxi wrote: Women are not out to take over with their evil shopping sprees and love of fluffy soap operas. Men are not rabid animals who cannot control themselves around a half naked woman.
I like shopping, fluffy soap operas and world domination and I'm a guy :O
On November 29 2012 20:01 zbedlam wrote: When you don't take the standard procedure billions of women before you have taken in finding a male with halfway decent genetics to impregnate you with of course you are going to take risks.
I agree that sperm donors shouldn't have anonymity at least in regard to hereditary diseases, but damn women shouldn't be so lazy when it comes to finding suitable genetics, put some effort in yo.
Yeah, because if you have a male partner who suffers from infertility for whatever reason or you are a women in a homosexual relationship the problem is clearly tackled by "trying harder".
Isn't sperm donation some kind of transaction ? Do the kids have a right about something else from a donor aside knowing who he is? It isn't even close to adoption, i don't know how a judge can consider the comparison between both any relevant. The guy who donated IS NOT his father.
If you guys read the article, you will find out adopted people aren't eligible to ask for their biological parent as well, so why should she be any different.
In fact from reading around, it appeared that she is the odd one, while the majority of donated born people does not think this is an issue, and happy with how it is, and wanting to honour their anonymity. A lot of people do not know their parents is, their medical history, it's just way of life.
I'm glad her mother's fertility speicalist destoryed the record.
I don't really know if i would want to donate my sperm to produce a child for some random couple i don't know. Maybe if i get to know them etc but that might also be odd for me since i will deep within always know that i'm the real father of their child. And what if i want to know my son and the couple perhaps doesn't want that? Or the child wants his/her's real father in the future? It complicates a lot and there is 100 situations which makes it hard.
The Supreme Court of Canada refused to hear the final appeal of Olivia Pratten today, giving no reason (the Canadian supreme court never does). The overturning of the decision stands, and sperm donors will remain anonymous.
EPT
. Only the real superiors play Zerg, and still make their opponents QQ :D lol
![[image loading]](http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity/li-cp-pratten-584.jpg)
