Posts Tagged ‘artificial reproductive technologies’

Surrogate motherhood creates an ethical minefield

May 13th, 2014 Comments off

A gay couple’s government-funded IVF twins have created a storm of controversy in Canada.

by Margaret Somerville

The announcement by Quebec radio host Joel Legendre that, later this summer, he and his male partner, Junior Bombardier, would become the parents of twin baby girls has received much media attention. It’s reported that the babies were conceived using “an ovum bought from an American [gamete] bank” (if only one ovum was used, they are identical twins, if two, they are sibling twins) and are being carried by a Quebec surrogate mother, who became pregnant though in vitro fertilization (IVF) paid for by the Quebec government healthcare fund (RAMQ). What ethical issues does this scenario raise? Read more…

Children of our God complex

May 13th, 2014 Comments off

by Lise Ravary, National Post

So soon after the secular charter debate, Quebec is now tearing itself apart over taxpayer-funded fertility treatments for surrogate mothers acting on behalf of male same-sex couples. Like the charter debate, this one is also a multilayered cake of rights. Gay rights, parents’ rights, donor rights, women’s rights, taxpayers’ rights. Read more…

The Equality Battering Ram

April 4th, 2014 Comments off

Brendan Eich has just resigned as CEO of Mozilla, maker of one of the most popular web browsers. He made a $1,000 donation to Proposition 8, back in 2008, an insubstantial sum really, to a campaign that is 6 years old. The Gay Lobby, the current shock troops of the Sexual Revolution,  demanded his resignation, or a show trial in which he repudiates his actions, or preferably, both. 

Listen to this short statement from one of the principals in the dispute, Geoffrey MacDougall, the Head of Development for Mozilla.  He pitches this as a conflict of rights, without taking sides as to which right should predominate. Read more…

Fertility treatment pioneer calls for caution

March 17th, 2014 Comments off

by Shannon Roberts

The renowned Lord Winston of Hammersmith is in New Zealand at the moment visiting schools to educate students about infertility and the dangers of waiting too long to have children.  It’s interesting – and a little ironic – that the fertility expert, who pioneered IVF while it was still in its trial stages, is now warning that the rapid advance in reproductive technologies is making people too complacent about having children.  He argues that many such technologies are, in reality, not very effective and cannot beat nature or the ticking reproductive clock.   In fact he goes so far as to contend that it is often an immoral industry which provides a soul-destroying experience for young couples who are desperate to have a baby and are driven to do things like re-mortgage their houses to afford the hugely expensive treatment.  Read more…

Barcoding embryos

March 10th, 2014 Comments off
What message is being sent when you begin life as a number?
As a child in a small American town I used to visit a tobacco shop to buy my sweets. It was hot one summer’s day and the quiet man behind the counter with a thick Polish accent had rolled up his sleeves. I remember seeing a number tattooed on his inner forearm. Tattoos weren’t fashionable then and the only ones I had seen were the anchors on the bulging forearms of Popeye.

A six-digit number was an odd choice for a tattoo, but I didn’t ask him about it. I was more interested in my sweets. Read more…

When to bite the bullet and have a baby

March 6th, 2014 Comments off

Though this article is about New Zealand, doubtlessly these facts are true in the U.S. and many other places, sadly.

by Shannon Roberts

Statistics released this week show that women in New Zealand between the ages of 35 and 39 are having more babies than women aged 20 – 24 for the first time.  In fact, the average age of first time mothers in New Zealand is now one of the highest in the developed world.  The number of babies born in 2013 in New Zealand was also the lowest number since 2003, down 4% from 2012. Read more…

Dorothy, We’re Not in Kansas Any More

March 5th, 2014 Comments off

Legislative battles are heating up across the United States on the issues of surrogacy contracts and the regulation of assisted reproduction. If we are truly concerned for the welfare of women and children, we must oppose such practices. Read more…

Don’t forget the conference this weekend!

February 13th, 2014 Comments off

Finally, Justice for a Donor Conceived Child

January 24th, 2014 Comments off
I’ve been keeping an eye on this case for a while.  The facts are unusually crass. A lesbian “couple” wanted to have a baby.  They advertised on Craig’s List for a donor. (Pause. Let that sink in.  Gross, eh?)  Anyhow, the man replied to their ad, and delivered a jar of sperm. She impregnated herself, without the assistance of a doctor.
The lesbian “couple” separates. The mother can’t make it on her own. She goes on welfare. The child welfare people in Kansas want to know who the father is. She hems and haws for awhile that she doesn’t know.  Finally she names him. The state wants him to reimburse them for child support. (Also, kind of crass, eh?  Not really THAT interested in the child: the state just wants it money back.)

Daddy Dearest

Daddy Dearest

The court ruled that he does not count as a “sperm donor” within the meaning of the law, because the two of them got her inseminated without the assistance of a physician. If a physician had been involved, the father would not have counted as a father, but as a “donor” and would not have owed child support. This makes it clear: the “sperm donor” status is a artificial status, created by the state, for the express purpose of keeping fathers away from their children, and fathers and mothers away from each other.
Anyhow, the good thing about this ruling is this: in the course of the litigation, the department of child welfare made a key statement.
“A person cannot contract away his or her obligations to support their child. The right for support belongs to the child, not the parents.”
Unusual facts, I will admit. But, at least someone in the government made this important statement. It is about time someone spoke up for the child and his rights.

The Mother-Free Money Tree

January 17th, 2014 Comments off

by  who will be one of our Speakers at the Healing the 21st Century Family on Feb. 15!

If we believe that human beings should not be for sale and should not be trafficked or manufactured like products, and if we believe that women deserve better than to be treated as mere baby machines, then we must oppose third-party reproduction.

The road to wealth is paved with Lupron and placenta. Read more…