# Article about private embryo donation arrangement gone wrong



## Noelayoung (Feb 17, 2014)

An interesting and emotive article. This Mum donated her spare embryo's to another couple on the basis it would be an open donation, with some updates on any baby born. But she suspects the couple had the baby and changed their mind about the agreed transparency.

/links

http://www.theage.com.au/national/embryo-donor-mum-upset-by-claims-of-lost-pregnancy-20160401-gnwl99.html


----------



## MandyPandy (May 10, 2010)

Hmmmm... I can see both sides. Ultimately they each agreed to the terms so they should have been upheld...but that was an awful lot of contact stipulated by the donor. 

I have two embryos that I'd like to donate at some point. My view is that there are no strings attached. If the recipient wants their child to know us, then that's fine but if not, then I'd respect their wishes. In my opinion, it's an unconditional gift and the way the donor in this story wanted full contact would be hard on the recipient to whom the child belongs.


----------



## nevertoolate (Jul 15, 2015)

hi,
I think it is a lot for the donor to ask for as then this has a lot of strings attached and not a straightforward gift to help that other couple. if the donor felt that strongly about future ongoing contact which may put a lot of strain on both sides, maybe she should not have donated in the first place or had the embryo implanted herself.


----------



## Sassy-lassy (Apr 19, 2012)

How very sad.  It sounds as if this poor woman had not really come to terms with the concept of donation, which has had upsetting consequences for everyone involved.  

As a 'donor' however, I think she and her DH were asking too much - surely her unused embryos would have been considered a precious gift.. not an investment to represent "the same hopes and dreams they had for their living children".  

Furthermore, the phrase 'it looks like she's decided to pass the child off as her own, and not inform anyone' is also very telling, as surely the resulting child is the responsibility and biological offspring of the donor recipient.  

The fear of someone else potentially wanting to lay claim to our baby is the primary reason DH and I sought treatment abroad from anonymous donors.  We won't need to 'pass the child off" as being ours.  It will be ours.


----------



## PinkPeacock (Nov 9, 2006)

Crumbs...what a mess. I also see both sides in that the recipient shouldn't have accepted that donor when they weren't prepared to comply with the terms. Once they'd agreed to the terms they are morally obligated to stick to them. 

On the other hand, if the donor was so invested in any offspring, then the recipient would surely feel that the child wasn't truly theirs. I'd not be able to cope with the idea of my child having contact with the donor. The way I'm getting my head around this is that the donor gives us one cell which provides the instruction manual for making a baby. I'll be the one doing the making. I don't mean to diminish the gift we are being given, but it is how I'm rationalising it. There will be no "passing off" the child as my own. The child will simply be my own. These phrases make me think the donor herself wasn't really appreciating the nature of the donation. A,l in all it's very sad.


----------



## MandyPandy (May 10, 2010)

That's exactly how I see it, i.e., the embryos are just cells. The recipient is the parent, the family, etc. I would want nothing to do with the child unless they wanted to seek us out when they turned 18. My children would not be their siblings,  they would simply share the same DNA, in the same way as I would not be their mother. 

The only 'bond' I feel with the embryos,  is that I don't want them to go to waste and if they can help someone else achieve their dream, then I am happy to give that gift - free and clear. 

I think the only thing I would want to know is general geographical location as I'd want to be sure that there was no way of them forming a bond with my children.


----------



## daisyg (Jan 7, 2004)

What a very sad situation.  I can see why the donor is so upset.  Those were the terms of an open donation.  If you don't want an open donation, then don't choose one.  Of course you can see that saying you want contact before the reality of pregnancy is there is all too human.  But, those were the terms of the donation and that child has fully genetic siblings, regardless of how much or little contact there is in the future IMHO.  In my opinion, the donor wax the ONLY one who appreciated the nature of the donation!

I would be delighted to meet my children's embryo donors, and I would be delighted and encourage them to meet the donors too if they wanted.  Sadly, I went to Spain and we have no donor information.  It may be possible in the future that a DNA database of children from the clinic is formed and they may be able to find half siblings if they wish.

I don't feel threatened by my children's donors at all.  I think about them quite a lot when I look at my beautiful children and wonder what they looked like.  We talk about them sometimes and wonder whether my daughter's height is from the lady or the man!  I am my children's mum and will always be.  But they are from their donors' dna not mine and that is important too.  How much it will be for my children in the future, who knows?

I hope that one day this story will resolve happily.

Best 
D xxx


----------



## nevertoolate (Jul 15, 2015)

Hello daisy,
May I ask if you see you children as your children or your donors children. I honestly don't think it is a question of anyone feeling threatened by the donors but what the question is what is a donation?.
Is it a gift or are the recipients obliged to maintain contact with the donor?
I believe it is a wonderful gift to allow us to be parents and should not come with any strings attached.


----------



## daisyg (Jan 7, 2004)

Hi Dreaming,

My children are my children, not the donor's children (although you could argue the technicality in pure genetic terms!).  The comments I made pertain to this specific donation which was an OPEN donation.  Therefore there were strings attached to this donation and the recipient should not have agreed to accept the embryos unless she was willing to honour the terms of the donation.  

The recipient in this case WAS clearly obliged to maintain contact as those were the terms.  Unlike an open donation, other clinic donations (anonymous or ID release) do not have an obligation for the recipient to maintain contact with the donor.  In the UK, it is up to the child to make an application to find out the ID of the donor, and that can only happen if the child knows they are donor conceived.  

You have mixed up regular donation with this specific case and they are not comparable.  

D xx


----------



## nevertoolate (Jul 15, 2015)

Hi
I have voiced an opinion that a gift of eggs really is not ideal coming with strings attached. No mix up in my understanding of this case. It is sad all round.


----------



## daisyg (Jan 7, 2004)

Hi Dreaming,
The way I see it is that in this case, the strings were attached primarily for the children as the donor's children would be the full genetic siblings of the recipient's baby.  

Anyway, we will agree to disagree on this point!!  

D xxx


----------



## nevertoolate (Jul 15, 2015)

Happy to take on board everyone's opinion. After all there is no right and wrong with the subject of donor eggs. It is down to personal decisions of the the parents of the child and no body else.


----------



## Gemini40 (Feb 9, 2016)

Yes, this is indeed a very tricky situation and confirms the importance of counselling to be sure of your decision. I feel that for the donor to need that amount of contact with the child she wasn't really ready to just let go and donate. As for the recipient with all the best intention in the world of keeping contact, once that pregnancy starts her mother instinct is kicking in and she is the biological and birth mum. The other lady being the genetic mum. I think that the genetics mum involvement would actually be very confusing to the child. I myself am aiming to use a UK donor so the background information is there should any child born feel they need it but if I thought the donor was going to be a part of our lives I would be going abroad. I feel for the birth mum- as the other lady is obiously very determined.


----------



## K jade (Aug 11, 2013)

Mmmm interesting article 
I feel the donor  was confused 
She should have decided if  she either wanted another child, or she wanted to donate. I don't think u can have both.  
I'm afraid I'm not for donors being in childrens lives. If a child wants to explore at 18 well that's different I guess.. 
And the idea of donors being on birth certificates is a big NO NO For me
You'll end up with parents running for the hills, bit like what this couple did. I really don't blame them.
Xx


----------



## Sassy-lassy (Apr 19, 2012)

Irrespective of the small print of the "contract", ultimately, my sympathies are with the donor recipient.  She may well have started out with the best of intentions re maintaining contact (though of course, we can't know for sure), but once the pregnancy was established, found the bond with her unborn child so overwhelming that the idea of contact with a 3rd party - especially one so keen on dictating terms - quite alarming.  
  
We all know the lengths to which childless women will go in order to have babies, which is one reason why the infertility industry is booming.  

Describing the woman who produced the embryos as a 'donor' is in fact, misleading... In the real world, a genuine donation - or gift - does not come with strings attached.  The donor's expectations of the embryo's recipients in this instance were too great and potentially, grossly unreasonable.  

To my mind of thinking, such an offer, whilst initially attractive to a couple desperate for children, is not morally right.  If a relationship between the donor and donor recipient had developed naturally and flourished, that would have been fine.  But to try and enforce contact between any resulting baby and the donor/donor's children is simply wrong.  

If she wasn't prepared to let go of her embryos as a genuine donation, perhaps the donor should have let them perish or used them herself.


----------



## nevertoolate (Jul 15, 2015)

Well said. I agree...


----------



## K jade (Aug 11, 2013)

It's almost as if donor wanted a free surrogacy service for her last embie, then all the benefits of a part time child. Just with the other woman doing the actual parenting slog. 
Couple should have gone to Europe for DE really


----------



## Jacobsmum (Feb 23, 2013)

I join those who think that this is a sad and difficult situation.

I think that if open donation exists as an option, then it is just that - an option. it isn't compulsory, and if you don't want open donation then you don't have to sign up for it. It was what this donor wanted, and was up front about and a legal option in the country where she was. So I think the recipient should have thought long and hard about whether she was really wanting to form her family that way.

I also think that maybe this donor was influenced by being in a country where donor conceived children have the legal right to identifying information about their donors when they reach adulthood. Maybe from her point of view, as a parent already, she felt 'well, if they are going to make contact (potentially) when they are 18 and are full genetic siblings, wouldn't it be better to have known each other from a much earlier stage?' To be suddenly thrown into a relationship when one (now adult) child decides they want to make contact might not be straightforward. If they've always known each other, or of each other maybe this makes it less of a big deal. They're not building up idealised 'perfect sibling' notions.

Do donations come with strings attached? Well, yes, sometimes they do. Maybe they shouldn't, but sometimes they do. In the UK, I know that donors can state certain things and their views will be respected/ acted on. For example, a donor can say they wish only to donate to a married couple. I spoke on a radio show in Scotland as the 'recipient mum', and had a range of negative responses from callers in to the show. Some these were just ill informed (why don't you just adopt?...Single mums are against God's plan...). Others had experience in different ways. I was quite careful in my response to someone who had been a sperm donor who chose to only donate to married couples - I thought it was important that I make clear (so people could think about donating!) that if donors had conditions then these would and should be respected. So I expressed my gratitude, and said I was also grateful that there were and are donors who will consider other types of family when they make their choices. Many more of the contributors were positive than negative, but it was the the only time I have directly faced negative comments about my choice and my family.

I was also struck by the fact that as well as all the other factors, when looking for a clinic you should try to guess what percentage of their clients are not telling them the truth about success for these sorts of reasons. So statistics in countries where (adult) children conceived using donors have similar rights to information may be higher than reported, since some 'successes' choose to just not tell the clinic anything at all, or, as in this case, give misinformation. A minefield!  

I hope that these individuals and their families are able to move forward without further media intrusion, and can reach some kind of understanding.
Jacob's mum.


----------



## nevertoolate (Jul 15, 2015)

This journey has really highlighted just how badly women are generally judged by some sections of society. Wrong if you have a child over 40, or work or are single. The list is endless.... We cant win.


----------

