The choice of cryogenic conception has similar effects on the child as adoption does

adoptee cryoThis new show on MTV got me thinking…. Something I never realized is that cryogenically conceived children will grow up with a lot of the same curiosities as adoptees. I never stopped to think how the child will wonder about their medical history on that side, and appearance, and genealogy just as I did. I began to wonder about the process of becoming a sperm donor and assumed there had to be a qualification process for potential donors so I did a quick google search on the subject. According to Stanford, there are about 150 banks and are typically located near college campuses because apparently, the qualities found in college students are in high demand. I wonder if it is a consequence that the typical college students are in demand of money! But on to the more pressing questions in my mind, how are they selected and what is the parting information that they maintain on the donor… or more accurately, the father? But then people don’t tend to think in those terms when it comes to leaving behind a piece of themselves that is then transferred to a mother and then passed on to the child. Also according to Stanford, there are a series of screening questions that will either qualify or disqualify the donor, for example, if the donor uses intravenous drugs and/or have diseases they are automatically disqualified. Some banks get very specific in the type of donors they are looking for with physical and mental traits as with a California sperm bank. They require gentleman to be at least 5’9″, between 19 and 38 years old and not homosexuals. Excuse me, but haven’t we scientifically proven that homosexuality is not inherited? Also, being a homosexual is not a disease, so I’m not sure why it would be a disqualifier. Their requirements list goes on but what I was really looking for was what kind of information is left behind for either the mother or the child. I think it is different for different banks, but for this one in California, they now allow a choice for the donor. They can either choose open or confidential donations. Hmmmmm, that sounds a lot like adoptions, too. The open choice says that the donor (father) allows the child to make one contact with the donor after they turn 18 years old. The confidential option is the traditional option which mandates that no contact may be made and the donor can choose what, if any, information to leave behind for the child. The California bank boasts that their progressive “open” option allows the child the right to their heritage while the confidential option protects the donor’s privacy. Ok excuse me AGAIN, but who has the right to deny any person knowledge of their birth right and heritage? But so kind and progressive of this sperm bank, kudos to you. They even pat themselves on the back for other banks adopting this practice. So the reality of this in my mind is that whether you’re an adoptee or a child who came from a sperm donation, part of you is a secret. Some people truly don’t care to know and never wonder, as is this the case with my brother, my uncle, and several others. But there are many that do care and just want to know. I would encourage men who become donors to please choose open donations or at the very least leave behind a complete bio on yourself, medical history, heritage, what you’re like on the inside and outside. If you’re the kind of man that doesn’t agree with that, then you really shouldn’t be passing down your genes to others anyway. Sorry that was a bit harsh, but at this time, that’s the way I feel about it. I can always be dissuaded! If you disagree with any of this, I want to hear it and why. All I’m saying is that if you are a sperm donor, please leave behind enough information on yourself that your child, once of age, can choose to find out more about you and possibly contact you. That’s the responsibility you bear when you freely choose to create another human being. Think beyond the cup…

4 thoughts on “The choice of cryogenic conception has similar effects on the child as adoption does”

  1. Great piece! I’d like to add that there is no such thing as a “confidential” option because DNA testing allows everyone to find relatives. People cannot create children and expect to anonymously walk away. In addition, while the donor may want privacy, grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins may actually embrace a relationship with the donor conveived child. This person is after all, their blood relative. So one person – the donor – does not get to speak for every single member of the family.
    Thank you for writing this!

  2. As an infertile man my wife and I considered using a sperm donor to build a family. We ultimately decided not to pursue it for multiple reasons on both sides but I did a fair amount of research on it.

    I think it’s important for the parents of raising donor children to be honest with their children at an early age. The worst thing any family can have are life defining secrets. Donor Conceived children to your point and Kat’s point need to have some type of direct access to the donor’s responsible for their conception. Be it they have an open donor from birth or some type of full access when they turn 18. Kat’s right with DNA testing and the internet unless the donor lives completely under the radar he will almost always be found. Why put the donor conceived through the process of having to go through an extensive search. Just get it over with and give them the option of having the ability to find one half of their genetic make up. And finally and most important is that the non biological parent raising the child cannot reject the child or hold any of their infertility grief against them. Almost all of the donor conceived stories I’ve read where the now adult hurts it’s where the non biological parent rejected the child. It’s never fair to the child and you can’t blame them for having the anger that they do.

  3. Agree with both Kat and Greg! Just because there wasn’t any “intimacy” or emotions between the man and the woman who created the life doesn’t mean the sperm donor gets to walk awway without a trace! There is still a responsibility not only to that donor conceived child but as Kat said, to the donor’s family. Donor facilities seemed to have been hap-hazardly created, albeit with good intentions, but just as in adoptions of years past, with zero regard to the child that has been created. Greg, thank you for your perspective, as well, you are absolutely right that the non-biological parent should never hold their issues against the child. No parent should ever do that, biological or not! Thank you both for your thoughts and feelings!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *