Log in

No account? Create an account
Vasaris, the Fuzzy Dragon
.:: ..::. .::..:...... .::

March 2014
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31

Vasaris, the Fuzzy Dragon [userpic]
I've got a question...

We know that, on occasion, males who have made donations to sperm banks have been gone after for child support. It's hard to get out of that, not when you can be proven to be the biological parent.

Has this ever happened to egg donors?

*is curious*

I mean, seriously, say the family splits up, or the mother dies -- would it be valid for the father to go after the egg donor for teh_monies?


That is a fairly horrifying prospect... I mean, while the genetic data was given in exchange for compensation, you did not in fact have voluntary sexual relations with the individual now trying to take your money...

1 - the places that supply the stuff really ought to have some way of legal binding the recipients against this sort of action. if that is not possible, i hope the donor successfully sued the shit out of them.

2 - This seems kind of like rape to me... I mean... I dunno. It is just a distrubing thought.

3 - I doubt it has happened to any egg donors, given that even on the very rare occasion where males win custody of a child, the woman is almost never ordered to pay support. in fact, if someone tried for child support, the anonymous egg donor would probably end up with custody of the kid.

Re: *ponders*

Some of it depends on where you are. The cases that I know of where sperm donors ended up on the hook for child support are all in Europe. I'm fairly sure that in the US, provided you go through a bank/have lawyers draw up the requisite documents, it's a lot harder to hook a guy for child support if he was just a donor.

But a thing just showed up in cf_abby_tribute where involving a woman who donated eggs to some friends who had fertility issues and the question just popped into my head.

'Cause I think it'd be grossly unfair to be able to hook a guy for sperm donation and not an egg donor.

Anyhoo, I think part of the reason the whole idea is kind of horrifying is:
a) You lucky males continously produce genetic material you can let loose more or less whenever you want. There's always more. And the harvesting procedure is hardly uncomfortable. ;) This can't be said of egg donation.

b) There's an intrinsic dichotomy in the way we think about males and females when it comes to this kind of thing. Guys are weirdly throw-away in the general perception of random genetic donation. Egg donation is not really thought of that frequently -- a woman is always the *mom*, the gestator, the one who gives birth. I think it's ingrained to not think of the woman as a contributor genetically at all. And isn't that a rather appaling extention of the whole "walking womb" concept. But, seriously, how often do you look at a pregnant woman and think "she contributed an ova"? It's really all about the "OMG, there's a bowling ball on her bladder!"

As for a support order -- that's true. Although it *is* getting more common (where more common is > 0 but not nearly as even handed as it should be). In fairness, though, women are still likely to be making significantly less than their (at the point of support orders coming down) former partners, and any decent judge (of which there are probably not enough) should allow for the person ordered to supply support to be able to, oh, eat, sleep, and clothe themselves.


No -- when a woman has a child via egg donation the mother who carries the baby and births the baby has her name on his or her birth certificate. Only in the event that a couple uses a Gestational Carrier would a woman have to adopt the baby after birth and then the intended mother's name goes on the birth certificate.

Never has an egg donor ever been legally responsible for embryos created by her genetics. Egg donors sign all rights away to those embryos the day she undergoes her retrieval and receives compensation for the cycle.

When a family sadly splits up or there is a death in the family, any said children would follow the same protocol as any other family. So no, a father wouldn't be going after an egg donor for money or to establish any sort of paternity.

The only time that would ever come into play would be for instance if you were a known egg donor, meaning you were perhaps a relative and you donated your eggs and it was arranged ahead of time in the event of a death in the family you agreed to be a guardian.

The only case I know of that is close to what you are talking about was a Gestational Carrier back east like in Pennsylvania carried twins or triplets for a couple. She delivered them around Thanksgiving time. The couple refused to pick their children up at the hospital because they were born during the "holiday season" (Can you freaking believe that???) And they were going to leave the babies at the hospital until they were finished entertaining. The Gestational Carrier said -- "I don't think so" And she took them home with her, and naturally so. What kind of parents for God's sakes would abandon their children so they could indeed entertain? There was a big court thing and I am not sure of the outcome. In this case however, I sure hope the GC kept custody.

Hope this helps.

Re: Nope

Seems rather sexist to me, then.