# Records of donor conceived children./



## roze

Dear all,

This may be relevant to a few threads but I thought I'd put it on the tx abroad thread first as more immediatly relevant.

I came across the following accidentally on the BAAF website ( adoption and fostering organisation) when researching donor websites today; I am not too sure of the context, ie whether it is recommended that all donor conceived babies have this on their records from birth, and how imminent any legislation change may be. Is it intended to apply only to people having donors in the UK? How does any official body know for certain that a child is donor conceived unless the parents tell them. Is it mandatory now for UK recipients to make a formal declaration?

I am particularly concerned as my hospital consultant, through some extensive ' fishing' during our meetings, is aware or has a good idea that my child is donor conceived abroad, and I am not sure whether she is obliged to formally disclose this to any official/third party. This does not appear on my own notes but I am aware that the hospital has their own notes on me, so am concerned as to whether this actually appears in print somewhere.

Is there in fact a ' stigma' to donor conception, and who holds this view- parents/dc children, or social workers. I do not hold this view but if enough people tell me there is a stigma might I or my child be inclined to believe them?

Donor-conceived children may still be denied information about their identity, says BAAF
Issued: 17 May 2007

The British Association for Adoption & Fostering is calling for amendments to the draft Human Tissues and Embryos Bill to ensure donor-conceived children have access to fundamental information about their identity.

The charity welcomed the Governments decision in 2004 to remove donor anonymity and supports many of the new proposals, but says they do not go far enough. Under the draft Bill, donor-conceived children will have the right to more information, such as whether they have donor-conceived brothers and sisters. But many children are never told the circumstances of their conception and so would not be in a position to access such information, says BAAF.

Julia Feast, BAAF Policy Research & Development Consultant, says:

The Government has shown its commitment to the life-long needs of these children by lifting donor anonymity and through the other proposals in this Bill. But these new rights to information mean nothing unless a child knows they were donor-conceived.

"We cannot ignore the lessons we have learned from adoption. Parenting a child who is not genetically related raises unique issues and this should be acknowledged in legislation. We know how distressing it can be for people to discover that their genetic identity has been kept secret. And our increasing knowledge of genetic disorders makes it even more crucial these children know their origins.

We believe there is a stigma surrounding donor-conceived births reminiscent of attitudes to adoption 30 or 40 years ago. Today, families come in all shapes and sizes and any new law should actively support parents and encourage openness."

The charity is calling for:

An urgent review of how children born as a result of donor-assisted conception have their status reflected in official records. The charity believes there should be an official way  as there is in _adoption  of recording every donor-conceived birth. 
The introduction of compulsory information and preparation sessions for prospective parents. These sessions would help parents to think through why being open with children about their genetic identity really matters. 
-Ends-

Notes to editors

For more information, please call BAAF press office on 020 7421 2632/3 or email [email protected] For out of hours enquiries, call the press office mobile on 07767 444 589._

any comments on this>

roze xxx

/links


----------



## roze

This came from

www.baaf.org.uk


roze   

/links


----------



## olivia m

Dear Roze
The Press Release by BAAF was in response to the publication of the draft Human Tissues and Embryos Bill last week.  As an adoption organisation BAAF believe that every child should be told about their origins and that the only way to make sure that parents do this is for the information about donor conception to appear on their birth certificate...the long version only so that privacy can be maintained on the short version.  There is no evidence that the government (the HFEA have now power over this) is minded to take up this suggestion.  DC Network has opposed it.  Although we do believe that all children should be 'told' we do not believe that putting the information on the birth certificate is the right way of going about this.  If you want to make your feelings about this clear, then the Lords Scrutiny Committee will be calling for responses and evidence in relation to the draft Bill over the next two months.
With regard to stigma about donor conception there is very little evidence that this still exists in the UK other  than in pockets of prejudice and some small minded people and communities.  By and large donor conception is accepted as one of the many ways in which modern families come into being.  It is certainly treated as one of the more 'normal' types of family by teachers for instance, who are very used to being told about the many different family arrangements children in their classes are experiencing at home.  People are often curious about donor conception...particularly perhaps if they feel someone is not giving them the whole story about their conception etc...but fourteen years of experience in DC Network tells us that by and large the news is received very supportively and that DC children do not feel stigmatised.  Being conceived abroad should make no difference whatsoever to this.
Hope this is helpful.
Olivia


----------



## Morvern

_"The charity believes there should be an official way - as there is in adoption - of recording every donor-conceived birth." _

This is an outrageous suggestion. The BAAF are really out of line here and I can't imagine what purpose they think it would serve to record that a child was donor conceived on the birth certificate. Donor conceived children are NOT the same as adopted and fostered children. Any child that I have carried and given birth to is my child and the state has no right to stick it's nose into my private family business.

It's because of suggestions like this that I will not be telling anyone 'official' about using a donor.


----------



## Anthony Reid

Thanks Olivia - we will be opposing this also.

Please let us know when you hear the Lords Scrutiny Committee asking for responses.

Tony


----------



## roze

Having just had a conversation with the BAAF press office, I am absolutely furious about their self righteous approach and lack of foundation in their arguments.  They are making assumptions as to how donor recipients bring up their children and wants to impose blanket rules on everyone imposed by law as they feel that the only way a childs interests can be protected is that if the telling of dc is compulsory and not left for parents to decide.  Big Brother is therefore back in town.

I have been half quoted various 'research studies' carried out by individuals with seemingly few legitimate research or academic credentials or peer review - nothing substantial as far as I can see but again, they make the assumption that people do not tell their kids on the whole, and do not ' appreciate' the issues a child may face. Again, us donor parents are portrayed as unthinking selfish beings who do not think about the child they are conceiving- only their selfish desire to have a child regardless. This is a fundamental strand of thought that seems to run through every argument they put forward. 

I would like to see properly researched large scale peer reviewed studies with evidence that 
a) a large % of donors are not telling their children( as BAAF have declared)
b) they are failing to deal adequately with the childs reaction when they do and 
c) the child experiences considerable psychological and emotional problems as a result of donor conception per se, which is not mitigated by supportive ' telling'.

I find the DC Networks response very heartening ( I know we have clashed before).

I consider that this is my business to sort out in the childs upbringing, not the state's.  One response from the BAAF to my call this morning is that if there is no stigmatisation why object to  having it on the birth certificate; my immediate response is that this is telling officialdom before I tell my child, who will be the first person to know , and it will be presented in such a way as not to be a problem. This means that a registry office clerk , who may be on a temp contract, will be party to confidential information about my child years before we tell the child.  What guarantee of confidentiality is that? I was accidentally given someone elses pregnancy book at my hospital the other day and found out confidential information about someone else _ I stopped reading it when I realised it was not mine- but I knew this persons name, address, and ' fertility issue' within seconds of opening the book.  It happens- we can't trust bureaucracy.  Unless parents start handing out the long form of the birth cert, how will the child learn about its dc status- it will still surely be up to the parents to tell them unless there is another government edict that insists on this being done by a certain age, failing which teachers/social workers will do the necessary.

Having looked very carefully into both the issues of donor conception and adoption, I fail to see the link.  Adoption is a totally different kettle of fish. It is likely that an adopted child will still have genetic parents around still and who will be in contact with them from time to time as they are entitled to by law and this can be very confusing. The skills therefore required in parenting adopted children  , who will have experienced rejection, and instability, etc are totally different.  The issue is not solely one of genetic links as suggested by BAAF.

To be honest, the BAAF should stick to what they are good at- ie adoption and fostering, and not meddle in areas which they are not involved in and of which they have little practical experience. Unless they are saying that donor conceived children are of course over represented in adoption and family breakdown cases, which I don't think they are.

It remains my view that the best way to protect the interests of DC children is to educate and encourage debate and openness, not propose draconian measures with arguments full of holes, that gets peoples backs up, and only serves to shut the doors on any further discussion, which this proposal would seem to do.



roze


----------



## Morvern

Thanks for ringing the BAAF press office. This has made me furious. 

Out in the world of the fertile how many children do not have the genetic father that they think they have because of affairs? it's a huge amount - a famous DNA study had to be abandoned when it was discovered that a large percentage of the children couldn't be genetically related to their fathers.  Also, according to an analysis of 280 000 paternity tests conducted in 1999 by the American Association of Blood Banks, approximately 30% of children are fathered by extra-pair copulations; that is, 30% of children in this sample were fathered by someone other than the woman’s long-term partner. 

So what are the BAAF going to do about that? Test babies DNA and force mothers to admit to playing away on the birth certificate? Of course not but they'll have a go at us because the fact is we are an easy target for this intrusive nonsense.


----------



## earthe kitt

I completely agree with Morven - we are an easy target

I once read somewhere that 1 in 10 of us is calling the wrong man daddy

Perhaps donor conceived children should be made to wear a symbol at all times to indicate their status as having a "defective" genetic history- a tadpole for sperm donor and chicken for egg donor. - hasn't something similar been tried in the past?

Well done Roze for ringing the press office and thanks for your support Olivia

I think most people will tell their children - it is better than the child finding out accidentally but to choose to tell them when they, the parents and the children are both ready, it may be aged 4, it may be aged 21 whenever.

Just  leave us alone to bring up our children and concentrate resources and legislation on the children and families who need it most


Jo


----------



## janeup

This makes me so angry. When I had my DD I had a terrible time with her birth certificate because I was a single parent I was kinda forced to put "father unknown" which was completely untrue - I just wasn't married! times have changed eh?

I hate this nanny state that thinks it knows best, that believes what it is doing is for the child. What I am trying to say, is that babies are born into difficult situations all the time and I don't think it is helpful to label them at such an early age. And labeling it is. For all the wrong reasons.

I read an article in the Guardian about egg donation over the weekend which said:

The whole concept of family is so wide open now," observes Lori Maze, director of Snowflakes, which helps parents sign over surplus frozen IVF embryos to other infertile couples. People who just a few years ago were trying to have a family are now poring over biographical profiles to select the families who will receive their own excess potential offspring. Full siblings are being raised in separate households, sometimes getting together for barbecues, sometimes unaware of one another's existence. "Family is not just that little nuclear genetic family that it was in the 1950s," says Maze.

and:

More recently, an "attachment" model of parenting has emerged: the idea that what a child needs most is a warm, bonded relationship with a loving adult - any loving adult, or six loving adults, or one, or two, male or female. You could call this the Harry Potter theory of child development: the idea that a parent's warm, unconditional love provides a magical protection against the many and varied trials of later life. This persuasive theory minimises the importance of having parents of both genders, and it minimises the power of the genetic bond to trump all others.
for the full article:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/family/story/0,,2080970,00.html

/links


----------



## hola69

Hi everyone,

all I can say is this is exactly why I have chosen to not tell anyone except these boards that my baby is conceived through Egg donation. I am so pleased now that we made this decision not only for us but for our child too....all my little girl will need to know is how much we wanted her and love her and how much we want to take care of her....

Thanks for sharing this guys,

Love L xxx


----------



## olivia m

Tony
DC Network had a call for evidence to the Scrutiny Committee today.  Because of the shortage of time they are only looking in detail at a few elements of the Bill...mainly scientific stuff.  If they haven't been in touch with you and you want to contribute on behalf of FF, call Claudia Rock in the Committee Office at the House of Lords...sorry I don't have the number.  The issue of identifying donor conception on a child's birth certificate is not amongst the items they are looking for comments on.  This possibility was excluded from the recommendations in the current draft which is why I indicated earlier that it did not seem that the government was minded to go down this path.
Best
Olivia


----------



## Morvern

I thought I'd better bump this thread up because it's in the papers today that the government are intending to make it law to make a note of donor conception on birth certificates.


----------



## Betty M

Thats not quite true - it is just a recommendation by a cross-party group of MPs and peers who are looking at the draft Bill.  The Bill isn't even in the Queen's Speech until later this year and then has to go through all the stages of the the House of Commons and Lords before becoming law so there is plenty of time still to make representations etc. It looks like there will be big changes to the draft Bill in any event given that all the people on the committee had objections to big swathes of it.  

Betty


----------



## Morvern

Ok - sorry if I've unnecessarily alarmed people. I just saw big articles on it in The Times and The Guardian today - including an opinion piece in The Times saying it was 'an excellent suggestion'. 

I certainly hope there will be big changes to the bill.


----------



## LiziBee

I've just seen stuff on this on the BBC - my head nearly exploded!  
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6924615.stmI don't want this on my next child's birth certificate (the short or the long one) and I fail to see how this could be applied to those who just don't tell anyone about their treatment. Grrrrrrrrrr. As for the 'well regarded ****' comment - don't make me laugh!
Lizi.x

/links


----------



## bottleofwater

But I am sure they can't enforce this law, unless clinics abroad co-operate with the government and share information on women's treatment.  But surely this is an invasion of pivacy.


----------



## Morvern

I imagine they could find out about donor treatment in this country from GP records. But if you have treatment abroad and don't tell your GP I suppose nobody would know.


----------



## Essex Girl

HI there

To add my 2p worth - I saw the item on the news today about this, and DH and I had something of an argument about it.  He is totally with the govt. line on this one - he feels there is too much secrecy, and the more open everyone is, the less prejudice and stigma there will be.  Although I agree that donor conceived children should know their origins (and we plan to tell ours in due course), I feel that putting it on the birth certificate denies the child the choice of whether he/she tells the world about his/her origins or not.  There is still a lot of ignorance and prejudice around, and some people feel more able to face it than others.  I recall a debate about the 69 year old Rumanian woman who had a baby in which a columnist from a national newspaper seemed genuinely surprised by the idea that the woman had given birth to a baby that was not genetically her own... I'm sure there isn't prejudice in enlightened circles, but some people are very unenlightened, and some are just bullies.  

And by contrast, when people have sex change operations, they can now have birth certificates in their new gender, so it looks as if they have been that gender and name from birth, so that they do not have to suffer the embarrassment of having to produce their original birth certificate and have people such as the passport office know that they have had a sex change.  If it is OK for sex change op people to keep that confidential, why cannot the same privacy be afforded to donor conceived children?

Final thought - if women are now going abroad for TX in order to retain the anonymity of the donor, will there be a corresponding increase in births abroad to save having to register donor conceptions?

We shall see.  I wish I had known about this debate earlier

End of rant and time for bed!

Essex Girl 

A birth certificate is a public document.


----------



## cb64

Hi everyone

I saw the news last night and cried.

It made me feel terrible. I have gone abroad because I don't have a choice. The UK waiting lists are practically non-existent. I would like a family (at the 11th hour). What's wrong with that?

The man interviewed on News 24 (Tom) seemed angry to me about his conception being kept a secret. But surely putting personal details on a public document is not the answer. 

How could this work in practice? The hospitals would have to issue birth certificates.

If people like me go abroad and then come back to the UK and say they just had IVF treatment abroad, how would the hospital/gps find out anyway. The only way would be consultation with centres abroad. The NHS would not be able to cope let alone co-ordinate this.

It did make me think about whether I should tell or not but then who do you tell, when and how? I would like to tell any offspring that I may have first before telling all the family.

There are many many thousands of people who can't trace their origins (myself included). I feel well adjusted without any hang ups. I just get on with life and am thankful for all that I have and not for what I feel is missing.

Again it is a case of the Nanny State intruding into private lives.

Essexgirl - I totally with you and echo all your sentiments.

If there is anyway we can lobby we should do.

best wishes
cb64


----------



## bottleofwater

If you go abroad you don't even have to say you had ivf.  Also do they not think that children conceived by donors will not be upset that this is on their certificate, maybe they might not want it acknowledged.


----------



## cb64

The birth certificate could be changed at a later date if the child specifically requests it. If as Essexgirl suggests, people who have their gender reassigned can request an updated birth certificate.

If  donor conception details are put on at birth what about the privacy rights of the child?

cb64


----------



## bottleofwater

the problem with this country is that it is all really about clamping down and trying to put people off.  We are neither as flexible as southern european and eastern european neighbours, or have in place a commerical but open system like the states.  Britian is about fear and conservation.


----------



## Colly

Are they going to dna test all children at birth and record the results on their birth certificate - put father unknown on all those where the dna doesn't match? Otherwise you cannot say the reason for doing this is that all children have a right to know the identity of their genetic parents. Our son will be told but I don't want it on a public document that anyone can see.
Collyx


----------



## bottleofwater

they couldn't afford to do that. Plus those women who have had affairs or who don't know who the real father is will not take kindly to this either.  It would be far too big brother like.


----------



## crusoe

To my mind it is unworkable and will never happen. The media just love IVF stories -the more contentious the better - and they have latched on to this one but nothing will come of it.

Cx


----------



## olivia m

Dear All
Here's the link to a thoughtful article by donor conceived adult David Gollancz in today's Guardian G2.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,2139678,00.html

Olivia

/links


----------



## bottleofwater

I would have liked the Guardian to have written from more than one aspect, as tackling a complex subject with only one valid point of view does not help the situation. It always seems so black and white when one person shows their coherent point of view. Having a child registered as being of donor orignis on a certificate may prove to be more harmful and I think it is for the parents to deceide what is best. It is ironic that the gorvernment treats a gestational surrogate mother (with donor sperm and eggs) as the rightful mother if she should so wish to pull out of an arrangement and for two years after the child is born. Yet wants to go out of it's why to get signicant information of donor origins registered.  So in one case they prejudice the mother the other the donor.


----------



## Morvern

The Guardian had another article today, bottleofwater. It was written by the head of science and ethics at the BMA. It is entitled 'More than a gene pool' and argues that the governments proposals would undermine parents. It is highly recommended:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2139591,00.html

/links


----------



## bottleofwater

ok morvern thanks, I was a bit too quick off the mark there.


----------



## Morvern

That's ok bottleofwater, I was going to post it anyway as a counterweight to Olivia's link.


----------



## longbaygirl

What a stupid idea. Soooooooo glad I did not tell my GP or hospital the origins of my babies.


----------



## olivia m

Hi all
Quite extraordinarily I missed Vivien Nathanson's excellent article in the Guardian yesterday and was glad to have my attention drawn to it.  DC Network's evidence, oral and written, to the Scutiny Committee was that putting information about donor conception on the birth certificate was much too blunt an instrument, as well as being unworkable in practice.  We believe strongly in the supportive, educational approach to encouraging parents to start 'telling' early and developing the story in line with a child's interest and maturity.  I put the link to David Gollancz's article because I think the perspective of donor conceived adults, albeit those conceived in another age, is worthy of taking seriously, even if it is not possible to agree with their conclusions.
Best wishes
Olivia


----------



## safarigirl

I have to agree with you on this Olivier, putting information like this on a birth certificate seems crude (I wonder what next ... information that  says "one night stand" "father unknown"  "mother took drugs" - i come from the camp of telling our child and honesty (dont want to debate this, as i also respect everyon'es opinions here, just my own personal thoughts) , but i would like all donor children not to feel marked in some way by it, and feel this birth certificate idea would bring more harm and actually stop people from been open with medical professions. I will read the article from the guardian ....
It would be intersting if your organisation asked donor children - those in their teens what they thought of this idea?


----------



## bottleofwater

Very good point safarigirl on info about origins of child re: one night stand etc. a very commonplace form of conception.


----------



## olivia m

Hi All
Both David Gollancz and another donor conceived adult Tom Ellis gave very powerful evidence to the Scrutiny Committee.  The point they made that I think the Committee took most seriously was that the state should not be complicit in a deception.  This point clearly does not apply to those people conceived as a result of one-night stands etc.  I think the argument about state complicity in a lie is a good one (although clearly it does not apply to those who have conceived abroad as these children do not appear on the HFEA register) but it needs clear and logical argument to show that using the birth certificate is not the best way of changing the climate in this emotionally laden and very personal area...and that indeed it could be counter-productive.  It feels particularly important that parents should have the opportunity to change their minds later and if they have lied to the Registrar about how their child was conceived (thus committing a criminal offence), they may feel that it is difficult to move to a 'telling' position.  We know of many families who only decided to 'tell' when their child was a little older and they couldn't bear the idea of having a relationship with them that was not based on honesty.  These parents should not be criminalised for having made a courageous decision.
The truth is that this proposal is likely to fall because of the very practical problems of implementation, but the Government is looking to make a quick decision about this and needs to have a wide range of views.  If you feel the urge to take part in the debate make sure you address the issue of 'state complicity'.  It is the central argument for them.
Best wishes
Olivia


----------



## safarigirl

thanks for that olivia (the points by the children are of interest to me, because i will use their expereince to guide me as well) - my point on one night stand, although flippant, was to show that many children are born of reasons that parents "do not tell" and would not serve the child any purpose to have stated in such a way - anyway i digress on this, i guess my gut feeling is that this is not the right way, (on a birth certificate) and that there could be another way of the state reaching its aims together with parents and of course most importantly the children.
I guess now having a donor conceived child i am absolutely interested in her rights, well being and how she is viewed ...


----------



## bottleofwater

to me it is about the governments fears rather than consideration of the child, yes they may not want to look complicit but they don't appear to be opening their arms to this form of parenting, educating prospective parents on openenss as early as possible would be a far better gift from the government than some bureacratic stamp and decision that could upset both parents and child.


----------



## olivia m

You would be surprised BofW...actually both David Gollancz and Tom Ellis are against donor conception per se, believing it to be too damaging to continue, but they know that this is not an argument that is acceptable to the government or virtually anyone else, so they rarely use it in a public arena.  The government is NOT against donor conception, but I absolutely agree that what they should be doing is putting resources behind the education and support of parents - and making sure that clinics are on board with this well - rather than putting info on the birth certificate.
Olivia


----------



## roze

I don't understand Olivias point about 'lying to the Registrar' and would appreciate clarification on the legislation. Is this proposed legislation requiring Registrars of births to ask a direct question about donor conception ie  and thereby if people say no then this is tantamount to a criminal offence? If so then this is absurd. 

What are the mechanisms for dealing with this, ie if people conceive from tx abroad then  is this an issue for them also, and given that this is increasingly the way that people are seeking such tx, how are the authorities to find out? Is this to be a common question at immigration or passport control.?
If donor tx is so increasingly rare in the UK due to lack of supply,then this new legislation will not be a lot of use hence whats the point in having it?

This legislation confuses several issues- one .the issue of whether donor conceived children have a right to be told the origins of the birth, the second is the presumption that parents do not tell their children this, and thirdly as  a result in order to guarantee that children know the only surefire way is to publicly log this by putting this on their birth certificate. Someone has already pointed out that a birth cert is a public document and therefore this information, which some would prefer to remain private can be seen by all and sundry. Birth certs are commonly asked for these days as ID so more people will know. If there is really an intention to ensure that children are told their status then surely there are more appropriate and gentler mechanisms possible.  As someone has already pointed out, this is a very blunt instrument. Not that I agree with any instrument- the very basis of state complicity in deception seems to be very false logic -anyone can be cited as father or mother on a birth certificate in circumstances other than donor tx- and people may do this for a variety of reasons-  no proof is required other than the referral from the hospital following the birth which identifies the biological mother, the definition being she who has given birth to the child. So how exactly can the state be complicit in a deception?  As far as I am concerned, the citing of a mother and father on a birth cert is based on a) the biological mother, ie the person who gave birth to the child, and b) the person who the mother claims is the childs father.  The definition of father and mother is therefore not one of genetics but circumstance and intention.  I went along to the registration of my childs birth and on the basis of my word had my DH recorded as the childs father.  The question is begging as to what further evidence will be  required to give this legislation teeth.  I suspect that it will bring up a whole load of human rights and privacy issues which will in the end get the bill thrown out- and a good thing too.


----------



## olivia m

You ask some good questions Roze but for the most part we don't know the answers yet.  I will quote below the conclusion the Committee reached after going through the arguments for putting donor info on the birth certificate -
"We recognise the force of the argument that the fact of donor conception should be registered on a person's birth certificate.  This would create an incentive for the parent(s) to tell the child of the fact of his or her donor conception and would go some way to address the value of knowledge of genetic history for medical purposes.  Moreover, unlike where children are born through natural conception, assisted conception, by it's nature, involves the authorities and we are deeply concerned about the idea that the authorities (ie. HFEA, Registrar General etc.) may be colluding in deception.  However, we also recognise that this is a complicated area involving the important issue of privacy, as well as issues of human rights and data protection.  We therefore recommend that, as a matter of urgency, the Government should give this matter further consideration."

As you say and imply Roze, this whole issue gives rise to some fundamental questions -

What does it mean to use donor gametes?  Are they 'just cells' or something more important than that?
What or who is a parent?  Tom E and David G would claim that the donor is a parent too...the only 'father' he has according to Tom in the Daily Mail this week.
What is a birth certificate?  What is it for?  Is it an official record of the birth of a child,  a document that legalises social relationships or something to do with genetic connections?

I don't think that it is intended that a Registrar would ask anyone registering the birth of their child if he/she was donor conceived.  But it is JUST possible (although unlikely) that not volunteering the information could become a criminal offence.

At DCN we are currently surveying our members by email about the birth certificate issue.  We have been inundated with responses, the vast majority of which are very strongly against this information appearing on a public document.  We will make sure that the Government is appraised of these views.
Best wishes
Olivia


----------



## Jennifer

Good Grief - Am I understanding this correctly ?  The law could be changed so that parents of donor conceived children are required by law to declare that the child is donor conceived ?  

I totally am against this - I cannot begin to tell you how much.


----------



## Maria Christina

Jennifer said:


> Good Grief - Am I understanding this correctly ? The law could be changed so that parents of donor conceived children are required by law to declare that the child is donor conceived ?
> 
> I totally am against this - I cannot begin to tell you how much.


I think it's disgusting, it's almost going back to the dark ages

where "illegitimate" was put on birth records

Terrible idea

it'll make parents liars, I won't tell the truth, if and when we have our children
I don't want them label

Bloody cheek


----------



## Womb with a View

Apart from being totally against the idea of labelling a child as being from donor origin on a birth certificate which can be accessed by just about anyone, I would also guess that Tom E and David G may well have other issues going on for them with their parents (and by parents I mean their legal parents, not the person who generously offered to help them become parents) which has probably led to them feeling the way they do about donation.  Just a guess, but an experienced guess at that.


----------



## roze

This whole legislation remains absurd and will surely interfere with the human rights of children. I look back on some of my earlier posts and conversations with the BAAF who claim that donor conception is similar to adoption. Having given birth since these conversations and encountered considerable pain and discomfort in the process, which is part of the territory of childbirth regardless of whether it is a vd or a c section, combined with the wonderful experience of having this wonderful child, I cannot think of anything further from the truth. 

I totally agree with WWAV on this - there are other issues coming in to play here. I also think that we need either as a group or individually need to put our point of view across to come of the MP's because it seems to me that the key players of influence remain the few who appear to feel aggrieved by the nature of their conception and who have no concern about going public with their views, whereas those of us who want some privacy and to protect our children, believing that disclosure is their call, do not get to put their views forward.  I would love in theory to be able to debate this issue publicly however my priority is my child and her privacy and  I am not prepared to do this at this stage- if ever.  Therefore the representation seems to be totally unbalanced.

Where are the opinions of those who either don't care , or have come to the conclusion that its not an issue.  I was given many examples of such people when I had the pre donor counselling at the Lister- they clearly exist.  

I am wondering whether it is appropriate for a few of us to arrange to meet/phone some MPs who have expressed an interest in this bill to put forward our points of view.

I know Tony is representing FF on this issue as one of the consultees- perhaps he could give an update ?  

roze    xx


----------



## Anthony Reid

Our current stance is against this.

We haven't been involved/invited on any consultation so far - but would be willing to voice our members views.

Roze - our resources are limited on this side of things - as its typically just me, but if you wanted to manage an FF consultation/committee on this matter then please get in touch.

Tony
x


----------



## roze

I also meant to say that the way to avoid the 'authorities' ( HFEA?) being complicit in ' deception' is for us all to do them a favour and continue to go abroad for tx which people will increasingly do if this law becomes reality.  This will also finally kill off donor tx provision in this country for good. This will in turn therefore make this particular law redundant, as the ' authorities' in the UK will hardly be complicit in any deception as they will not be involved.  In a way this may be a blessing for people seeking donor treatment as clinics and services abroad have for me at least been more professional, cheaper and more successful than tx in the UK. 

Being a little  flippant now ,the abolition of the HFEA would also remove the problem....not sure what they have ever done for me for the £300 I have paid them in my various IVF tx's in the UK....just a thought...

If 'holding back' information on donor conception in the future becomes a criminal offence, I would dearly love to be the first ' test' case.

roze


----------



## roze

Hi- my second post/rant  has just crossed with Tony's - this is something I would like to consider before getting back to you, Tony; anyone else interested?

roze


----------



## Womb with a View

roze said:


> This will also finally kill off donor tx provision in this country for good.
> roze


Maybe that is their aim!!


----------



## bottleofwater

It is typical in Britain to be so halfway house, we are reluctant about egg donation but not as reluctant as our northern european neighbours but could never go out on a limb like say the states, where it is a viable commercial industry or like eastern and southern europe where it is becoming standard practice.  It is the same with surrogacy we allow it but could never adopt it the way the americans have.  Nothing regarding fertilty in uk stands out above any country we just like to dip our toes in water.


----------



## olivia m

I agree with Bonnie about making this thread accessible to a wider audience.  The proposals actually have much more impact on people using donor conception in the UK than those going abroad...although potentially it could affect both.
It is really important that parents make their views known to the Department of Health (not the HFEA who have nothing to do with it) about these issues.  The donor conceived adults who are speaking out have a very narrow perspective, but they are organised, highly articulate and influential.  They DO feel they were damaged by the secrecy in their family but it doesn't have to be this way if parents are open from the beginning.  
If you believe that this proposal is wrong, the Government needs to know.
Best
Olivia


----------



## safarigirl

does anyone have a link to the guardian article?


----------



## three_stars

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2139591,00.html
this is the only one i saved... mayeb if you look further back in the thread? I think they may expire though as some where from May. Maybe someone else on FF has saved the articles and could reprint them here.
bonnie

/links


----------



## three_stars

sorry but found some more but may still be missing one.. sorry to not been more complete with last post.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/family/story/0,,2080970,00.html liza mundy Mummy Daddy Donor

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6924615.stm BBC news aug 1 call for Donor awareness

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2139591,00.html Vivian Nathenson More then a gene Pool

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,2139678,00.html David G Time to Stop Lying.

It is the one of Tom E I believe I am missing if anyone has it??

Bonnie

/links


----------



## olivia m

Here is the link to the article about Tom Ellis in the Daily Mail last week. He also had a letter in The Guardian yesterday. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=472553&in_page_id=1879
Olivia

/links


----------



## Morvern

This is a letter to The Guardian yesterday from Professor Robert Dingwall. It's so good I thought I'd paste it:

_"The proposal to identify children born as a result of gamete donation through their birth certificates must be the last throw of a lobby whose efforts have resulted in bad policy over the last five years (More than a gene pool, August 2). Having succeeded in engineering a collapse in the supply of donor sperm and eggs the authors of this proposal now intend to add to the humiliation of prospective parents, a group whose voices have been largely unheard in these debates. The rights-based argument follows a false analogy with adoption: donor conception does not begin with an act of abandonment but a gift or sale. There is no substantial evidence of damage to the identity of children born by these means. The proposal wholly ignores the larger number of children whose registered father is different from their biological father but who have been conceived in a natural fashion. This measure lacks evidence, justice and compassion. It should be resisted."_
Professor Robert Dingwall

http://www.guardian.co.uk/genes/article/0,,2142491,00.html

Olivia is right about the people pushing this being organised and influential. We need to do something.

/links


----------



## hola69

what a fab letter from the Professor..couldnt agree more "!!!

Love to all

L xxx


----------



## LiziBee

It strikes me that if they were to do this (and I really hope they don't) the birth certificate would need a whole new set of boxes to show 'genetic parentage' (or how ever you want to phrase it) as other wise it could only apply to donor sperm and not donor eggs. Without this extra space it might be 'sex discrimination' against the father - what do you think?
Lizi.x


----------



## LiziBee

Bonnie - I have found links to this from the News board as well as the Donor board but I'll flag it up.
Lizi.x


----------



## three_stars

ok Thanks  I will have a look over there.
bonnie


----------



## safarigirl

Thanks Lize

Bonny you make valid points - i wish we could read research that looked at all donor children, inlcuding those who are happy, what proportion of people tell, when they tell etc.  This would guide us so much more than "legislation".  I wonder what the government is basing this on - how "big" the problem  (i.e. of people not telling, and then if that proportion demands such heavy handed tactics) is etc ... some valid research would prove worthwhile, perhaps i should do it myself! Perhaps i will speak to Olivia/ff abroadies etc about setting up some research?  What do you think?


----------



## Morvern

The problem is with the kids whose parents never told. You can't interview them and ask them how they feel about never having been told. This is what makes the research into this difficult.


----------



## safarigirl

I was thinking of surveying parents - and asking those who would tell - to get a percentage - the government is basically saying i guess that children arn't told, and i was thinking that research could guide this, as well as people who have told giving guidance on when they told etc ... just a thought ....


----------



## three_stars

very good point Morvern


----------



## three_stars

maybe the IVF clinics would have to be involved.    But then ultimately that would just cause IVF treatments to increase to cover the costs of additional research to counteract a really stupid idea that the government/ board of Health came up with !!!!


----------



## bottleofwater

I think when and how to tell the child really is where the fundamental debate comes in.  The governement doesn't seem to be able to articulate their concerns and has jumped rather insensitively at the idea of stamping it on a piece of paper. So yes I agree with Morvern and SG on this.  In fact all parents even those who conceive on one night stands should have help in talking to the child.  I do know of adults conceived via the one night stand and have grown up thinking their father was their bio dad only to be knocked for 6 that he isn't. I do believe that women who have gone through the rather stressful experience of infertiltiy and then ivf and donor are by and large very responsible and devoted parents, who have strived for a child, the government shoudl be sensitive to this rather than make them and their offspring feel like lepars.


----------



## Morvern

I did read a research paper on donor conception a while ago which did indeed say that the majority of parents don't tell. The problem is, as I mentioned before, that you can't interview these kids so there is no evidence either way that they are fine or not. Those who are arguing that not telling the child is psychologically damaging are therefore doing so on the basis of no evidence. 

The idea that it is damaging not to tell the child comes from situations where the child inadvertantly found out, or where someone blurted it out in anger or after a bereavement. Obviously this is seriously damaging and is what everyone would wish to avoid. Writing it on a legal document is not the way though, and donor parents in the UK are already legally obliged to undergo counselling (which presumably stresses the importance of telling at a young age). You'd think that would be enough for the proponants of this.


----------



## bottleofwater

hi Morvern

Yes I don't like the idea of compulsory councelling either, maybe a pamplet with research evidence would be great.  I know there are books out there on how to tell your child at a young age and this would be something that the government should invest in and give out compulsory so parents could feel support rather than judgement.  

i am surprised you say the majority of parents don't tell, as the stories I read on here seem to be quite the opposite, maybe an awareness brought about through the online culture has made people talk through approaches, this site certainly helps in that situation.  Maybe someone should do a poll on FF to find out what furture and current parents will do?


----------



## Morvern

Hi bottleofwater

I think it's quite a recent idea that the child has a right to know it's origins, and the data from the paper I read was perhaps a few years old.

Here is a paper from the journal Human Reproduction that you might find interesting: http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/12/2/392

*"What are the effects of anonymity and secrecy on the welfare of the child in gamete donation? *

_A perennial concern when using donated gametes in infertility treatment is the effect on the child and his/her family of the traditional anonymity of the donor, and of the secrecy of the procedure. As all involved, from potential parents to carers, wish to maximize the 'welfare of the child' born of gamete donation, conflicting attitudes, sometimes translated into diverging legislations in Europe, are analysed. In the face of the lack of evidence on the consequences of secrecy or openness, it is concluded that future parents are best placed to decide on this matter for the potential children."_

/links


----------



## bottleofwater

hi Morvern

Thats a very good quote.  I think it is the most sensible and intelligent way of dealing with these issues, not for anyone to dictate.  I do think trends of telling children at a younger age will happen as donor eggs conception become more visibly acceptable and talked about, which it has become in the States. With even leading ladies alluding to the aid of having donor eggs.


----------



## roze

The other drawback to this crude ' one size fits all ' /sledgehammer legislation is that it can make parents unwilling even to discuss donor issues with their GP and other medical professionals lest that this leads to donor tx being put on some records or list and judged.  I do think that this may come up if problems arise with the childs health and a detailed family history is sought and assumptions made on the basis of the donor parents health that may be wrong or lead to an inappropriate course of treatment.  It is much safer to be open from the outset about the fact that there is little information on part of the genetic history however attitudes and the potential harm this legislation could do will just make people hold back information inadvertantly.

Before anyone points out that this lack of information is the downfall of donor tx, I would also say that genetic details are often incomplete or inconclusive anyway, and people do not take this into account generally when falling in love and conceiving children in the ' standard' way, unless there is something that really stands out from the norm.  It is not always possible to screen for every possibility in any case and even when there is a genetic predisposition for something, this is usually a guesstimate based on probability which may never come to fruition- epigenetics, I believe! 

Morven is a gem for uncovering this research- I think we should assemble a virtual library of these links as a resoource.

roze


----------



## bottleofwater

It is a shame this thread cannot be moved to the donor threads, or at least a duplicate posted.


----------



## olivia m

Hi Morvern and others
The article you quote from is from ten years ago and I happen to know that one of the authors, Francoise Shenfield, has shifted her position considerably since then, although I doubt she would support having info on the birth certificate.  A more up to date piece of research is 'Non-genetic and non-gestational parenthood: conseuences for parent-child relationship[s and the psychological well-being of mothers, fathers and children at age 3' in Human Reproduction Vol21, No7 pp 1918-1924,2006.  The authors found that 46 per cent of parents of donor conceived children intended to 'tell' the children.  Egg donation parents were more likely to 'tell' than those who had used sperm donation.
As others have pointed out, research in this area is tremendously difficult because of the secrecy that has traditionally prevailed.
DC Network is contemplating seeking funds to run short preparation courses for couples and individuals contemplating or undergoing donor gamete treatment...also writing and disseminating information packs that could be handed out by clinics to people contemplating donor treatment.  There would be no question of telling prospective parents what to do - simply raising their awareness to the long term implications and letting them know that support and materials are available to help with 'telling'. I wonder what you all think of this idea?
Best wishes
Olivia


----------



## bottleofwater

Hi olivia

I think that is a good idea as long as the courses are not made compulsory, as I can see that as one step towards a procedure where sooner or later a judgement is being made, or some long convultued system the government would want to put in place.  But to have phamlets given out and information is great as I am sure it will help in giving parents ideas of how to approach their situation, I think raising awareness is a good idea because I sure lots of parents don't know who to turn to.


----------



## safarigirl

Olivia thanks for the reseach info you have posted, appreciate it - i think info to couples would be great - i did a fair amount of reseach myself, read up etc, but not evreyone has the time, or resources etc to do this .  I also think that parents could know of the resources available and that there is "help/advice" in telling children should this be the route they wish to follow.


----------



## LiziBee

Olivia - it sounds like a great idea! I'm sure we would have liked to do a preparation course had one been available.
Lizi.x


----------

