Letters to the Editor
-
some feminists may believe this but I don't think that there
is any intrinsic connection between these ideas and what most people call feminism, good or bad. Feminism is about power (or fairness or equality depending on your point of view) for women. For instance one of the ways to promote power/equality/fairness for women is to ELEVATE the idea of motherhood to the point where everyone who is NOT one (or potentially one) is treated as a child, at least regarding competence/intelligence/decision making authority.
-
Annonymity vs Knowledge
To Mizbinkley:
The right to know trumps the right to anonymity for extremely obvious reasons. Knowing where you come from is much more important to the child than privacy is to the donor. For the child the information goes right to the very essence of their identity. For the donor it is simply a matter of inconvenience and small concerns about social stigma. Comparing the two issues is like trying to equate a large whale with a small rabbit. One thing is simply much bigger than the other.
-
The right to know trumps the right to anonymity for extremely obvious reasons.
obvious to you maybe, your argument is entirely circular. You present nothing which would give anyone who doesn't already completely agree with you any reason to reconsider their position.
-
To: Anonymous (18 year old girl)
It is NONE of your fucking business whom the sperm donor is. Get over it. If you are dumb enough to show up at the donor facility or someone's doorstep you are trespassing and violating their rights to privacy. Grow up.
-
there is NO reason to donate sperm other than a desire on some level to reproduce
so it's a little hard for me to believe that the donor would be COMPLETELY uninterested in the outcome, this isn't to say they think it would be worth the trouble, but a complete lack of interest seems weird so it seems like done the right way most donors would be willing to engage in some communication. The medical issue can't be discounted either, just because not everyone has access to medically relevant genetic information doesn't mean that you can reasonably expect people not to want to know what they can.
-
Circular Argument? I think not.
The point is to try and be objective.
It's obvious that some donors would prefer to remain anonymous.
It's obvious that the resulting child usually has at the very least curiosity.
And it *is* obvious to objective disinterested people that the child's issue is much more significant.
Now it may not be obvious to some people--such as inherently narcissistic sperm donors. But that is only because that small percentage of the population can be so completely selfish that they have a hard time understanding basic rules of empathy that the rest of humanity learned in pre-school.
-
To: Stephen de las Heras
Whom a donor is not the concern nor does the offspring have a right to know whom they are. Simply put the law does not give the right to know, if the donor wishes to remain anonymous. Fortunately, there are significant legal reasons (from a financial liability standpoint) for facilities who collect the goo to keep this data confidential. The offspring should address these issues to the individuals who had this take place and raised them whether a single mother or parents who could not conceive. Using a sperm donor is the act of a selfish parent who, biologically & sociologically speaking, could not conceive otherwise but fucking felt compelled to procreate when there are plenty of children who need to be adopted. Tough shit on the kids who want to know. They are not legally entitled to know, end of story. Trot all the bullshit straw men arguments you like to knock down, but the law DOES NOT provide a right for them to know.
-
Who mentioned the law?
I was just talking about what is morally right and what is morally wrong. Ideally the law would reflect this, but it sometimes falls short.
The first step to changing laws is realizing they are unjust, and making people care about it enough. Not just saying "tough luck". Apparently in the UK they now have the right. It's only a matter of time.
I totally agree that the mothers are complicit in the whole raw deal--again, for selfish reasons of their own.
-
It is highly unlikely that
the law will be changed to provide for and allow the offspring of sperm donors to seek them out. This would also open the door to financial/child support to be levied against sperm donors. Consequently, you won't see a change in the law, fortunately. Blame the recipients, not the donor.