[Closed] Britain has just nine registered sperm donors.

I can't produce any so it'd just be a dry run from me..
😉

Literally, Junkyard.

Can't be surprising as they removed the right for anonymity a few years back.
Who would want a child from a donation turning up 20 years later as it would surely have a massive impact on what could be another family

Can't be surprising as they removed the right for anonymity a few years back.

This

Above: Spot on.

After the last round of IVF I got a letter asking if I would consider being a donor and, whilst the thought of being able to help a couple struggling did appeal, the possibility of opening myself to child support etc down the line meant that it was a non-starter.

Can't the Audi drivers lend a hand, they've had lots of practice

[i] the possibility of opening myself to child support etc down the line meant that it was a non-starter. [/i]

reading the article you're not running that risk, just that the child can ask for your details when they're 18.

The change in the rules in 2005 means children conceived using donor eggs or sperm will be able to trace their biological parent in the same way as children who are adopted

For this reason, I'm out. They may have no financial or legal claim but for me the risk of effectively a random stranger turning up out of the blue in 18 years and it screwing up other relationships in my life would be too high.

With only nine donors is there not a high risk of accidental incest?

Scotroutes: Seeing as 3 of the 9 are actually me I'd say so yes.

[i]reading the article you're not running that risk, just that the child can ask for your details when they're 18. [/i]

Yer, right - take it you've not dealt with the CSA...

"One of the problems we have is this myth that you become the father either legally or socially," Ms Witjens said.
"Children may want to know who their biological father is, but it doesn't mean to say that at the age of 18 they knock on your door and call you daddy. It's about curiosity."

And here Ms Witjens is deliberately ducking the point of the impact of the change in the law. There's no "Myth" about being forced to "become a father". There's a very real fact that anonymity has been taken away from the donor. It's about protecting one's future self from any form of disruption. Anonymity gives the donor that and they need to be honest that with the loss of that, there's no wonder theyve lost donors. I cant see how a cartoon character advert (FFS) is going to reverse that.

[i]"That's the way the Danish do it. They proudly say, this is the Viking invasion, exports from Denmark are beer, Lego and sperm. It's a source of pride."[/i]

I've just had a terrible vision of my son's bedroom in ten years' time.

I thought this comments was spot on...

I am sadly surprised by the frivolity and superficiality with which such a transcendental issue is dealt in the article and the comments. Obviously the author understand very little of what is behind these sort of endeavors, and what it takes to recruit and become donors.

She does not mention the DNA screening to leave out around 240 congenital diseases which could lead to a very sick and unhappy life both to the parents and the child, the altruism and generosity behind something like this, the anguish and pain of the couples who cannot use own gametes because they are sterile or too old, or carry deleterious genes and they know it.

This topic, so vital and needed by some people, is dealt in this article as if talking about a Prada bag, when what is at stakes is people lives, both the parents and the child, and the understanding that the donation is about a healthy cell. The donor is not donating a child that will eugenically improve the human race transmitting his fantastic traits, but a cell that will help a couple to conceive a healthy child through a pregnancy, with all the bonding that pregnancy means. The couple is receiving a cell that they don't have of their own, that will help them to create their own descendence, deposit in someone a kind of love that is only meant for a child, and transcend in life.
The author forgets the pain and frustration most couples have undergone for years till they get to the chance of a donor, dealing with this as if with a new car.

It is a shame that having the chance of sharing the difficulties and anguishes of such a capital topic, and creating awareness, this issue is treated with the most frivolous lack of empathy and insight.

Crikey ... does that mean someone in future might be marrying their own brother/sister?

Does that mutate the gene pool?

😯

[i]Britain has just nine registered sperm donors.[/i]

Is it not nine new registered donors [b]this year[/b]?

Crikey ... does that mean someone in future might be marrying their own brother/sister?

Does that mutate the gene pool?

Do you think that if you followed your own line back to Africa there would be no such close relationships anywhere on that line? 🙂

If they somehow met within a generation or two then it could be "interesting". But the chances of that happening are pretty slim. Further down the line I'd imagine genetic testing will be much more common place and the doc would probably have a quiet word if it turns out you were related 🙂

[quote=bearnecessities opined]Literally, Junkyard.

Personally I always found him to be full of shit

PS it took me a while to work it out 😳
Very funny 😀

Is it not nine new registered donors this year?

Sort of - the bank has only been open a year so yes - but that's not brilliant however you cut it. I've been trying really hard not to say that the bank has only had 9 successful deposits this year.... and failing.

To be fair, 9 is still more than I can count on one hand.

But are there not thousands or tens of thousands of the little swimmers per spurt ?

So 9 x a very large number is an even bigger number? You only need one of them don't you ?

Anyway, perhaps this lack will help kids get adopted. Or is it somehow a "right" to have your own even if you cant ?

Britain has just nine registered sperm donors.

Anyway, perhaps this lack will help kids get adopted. Or is it somehow a "right" to have your own even if you cant ?

My thoughts exactly. Does seem bonkers to be 'cooking' more when there are plenty needing a home and loving parents already. But you could say that about naturally conceived too I guess and it would seem a bit churlish of those that can conceive to make that sort of judgement about those that can't.

peterfile - Member

Crikey ... does that mean someone in future might be marrying their own brother/sister?
Does that mutate the gene pool?

Do you think that if you followed your own line back to Africa there would be no such close relationships anywhere on that line?

If surname or family name work properly then the chances might be very slim. No surname or family name then high chances ...

If they somehow met within a generation or two then it could be "interesting". But the chances of that happening are pretty slim. Further down the line I'd imagine genetic testing will be much more common place and the doc would probably have a quiet word if it turns out you were related

Is the probability greater than that of a Lotto Jackpot that is the question?

Yes, it would be good to genetic test people ... filter out the bad genes. 😈

if Ms Witjens was personally prepared to lend a hand in the process I may be tempted to sign up...shes not to shabby is she..

There was shortage the other day in central London. A spokesperson explained that it was because there had only been four people booked in the previous day. Three had come on the bus, and the other one missed the tube.

Just seen on the bbc website another link with this story of ' why choose Birmingham for a sperm bank.' haven't clicked on the link but are they being nasty about brummies?

Scapegoat - Member

There was shortage the other day in central London. A spokesperson explained that it was because there had only been four people booked in the previous day. Three had come on the bus, and the other one missed the tube

😆

Who needs sperm donors when you have a ready supply of ****less fathers on council estates?

Yer, right - take it you've not dealt with the CSA...

worth noting that you're protected from that if you are an official sperm donor, donating via proper clinic etc.

There appear to have been a significant number of people trapped by them after being involved in less formal 'turkey baster' operations with friends though, and they aren't protected.

wwaswas - Member

Anyone on STW feel they have the right stuff to be able to sherman for their country?

It's always dangerous, turning your passion into work, it can take all the fun out of it.

I'm as a big a fan of ****ing jokes as the next person, but being a little serious....

When I read the article, my first thought was how awful it was people wouldn't altruistically spend a little time helping another couple have a child. I don't think I could do it though. I would spend my life wondering if there was another little mcph running around somewhere. I'd want to know how they were etc.

Round of applause to those nine though.

My thoughts exactly. Does seem bonkers to be 'cooking' more when there are plenty needing a home and loving parents already. But you could say that about naturally conceived too I guess and it would seem a bit churlish of those that can conceive to make that sort of judgement about those that can't.

ninfan - Member

Yer, right - take it you've not dealt with the CSA...

worth noting that you're protected from that if you are an official sperm donor, donating via proper clinic etc.

There appear to have been a significant number of people trapped by them after being involved in less formal 'turkey baster' operations with friends though, and they aren't protected.

I've not really thought about it up to now, I was listening to Radio 2 and they had a lady on who had a baby a few weeks ago from a donor and a chap on who was a donor (given the small number of donor he might have been involved in this one).

The new Mum was over the moon and very grateful, the Chap was Gay and said "my sperm was going to waste" - you get the impression he was happy with the though of his DNA carrying on once he's gone.

I'm going for the snip soon, which involves at least 2 'donations' post op to check it's worked, I've got over the thought of having a shuffle in hospital, so I'm tempted to make a donation.

One thing that worries me, whilst the idea of 18 years later someone coming to knock on the door to say hi doesn't bother me - I'd be doing it with the knowledge of my Wife anyway so it's not like it would come as a shock, but whilst they say you're not financially liable now, they said you were anonymous in 2004, until you weren't...

I think the fairest way would be an opt in/out option for the donor - the chap on the Radio today was delighted by the idea of one of his offspring coming to say hi, I might not be the same way - I understand that people want to know where they came from but you can't always have it all - they may bemoan not knowing whose DNA they share, but even the nuttiest of nut jobs would have to concede it's better than not existing at all.

badnewz - Member

Who needs sperm donors when you have a ready supply of ****less fathers on council estates?

Mostly people who can't otherwise have children and don't fancy hanging around the local flat roof pub at closing time waiting for a bunk up.

badnewz - Member

Who needs sperm donors when you have a ready supply of ****less fathers on council estates?

Do the middle & upper classes not have their own ready supply of ****less fathers?

whilst the idea of 18 years later someone coming to knock on the door to say hi doesn't bother me -

If only you could guarantee it would be so jovial. The fruits of your loins could turn out to be a first class bunny boiler out to seek revenge in your part in their crap childhood, want a relationship with you and your family you don't want and won't take no for an answer, could go for a bit of emotional blackmail regarding covering their college fees or just reopen old wounds if your partner in twenty years time was unable to have kids with you.

It just seems odd - they want an 'asset' from members of the public but want to set the terms and conditions for you to give the asset. They are then surprised when the public reject the terms and conditions.

Round of applause to those nine though.

Not going to shake them by the hand?

If only you could guarantee it would be so jovial. The fruits of your loins could turn out to be a first class bunny boiler out to seek revenge in your part in their crap childhood, want a relationship with you and your family you don't want and won't take no for an answer, could go for a bit of emotional blackmail regarding covering their college fees or just reopen old wounds if your partner in twenty years time was unable to have kids with you.

It just seems odd - they want an 'asset' from members of the public but want to set the terms and conditions for you to give the asset. They are then surprised when the public reject the terms and conditions.

This +1

Wonder whether it was a ploy to discourage sperm donating in the first place? What government introduced the rules, Catholic Blairs?

"the possibility of opening myself to child support etc down the line meant that it was a non-starter."

reading the article you're not running that risk, just that the child can ask for your details when they're 18.

Until the next change in the law?

Kudos to the beeb hack that wrote that article... They managed to get 'coming' three times

I've not managed that since I was 21

Hmm, I gave a 10yr insurance deposit recently and had the option of free donation at the end of the term. Didn't take it ad the forms were thrown at me at the last minute and I wanted to discuss it with my wife. Not sure I would knowing that. Moreso the impact it could have on my daughter knowing/ not knowing she has/might have a sibling out there. I'd hate that personally, never knowing, seeing someone in the street and wondering if its them, wondering if they know...

I do understand how any kid must feel, it must be soul destrying for some. On the other hand, my husband gave sperm for cash in the 90's, he is now terrified of any progeny turning up at the door. When he gave sperm it was anonymnous. No wonder men will not do it.

Friends of ours are paying 4k a time for fertilization, the sperm (From Danish men) costs 2k.