|
|
We Are Donor Conceived People
|
|
|
| Ontario To Open Adoption Records |
[06 Jun 2008|03:51pm] |
McGuinty Government Helps Adoptees, Birth Parents Unseal Personal Information
Toronto, ON. May 14, 2008
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/May2008/14/c2447.html
A new Ontario law will soon give adult adoptees and birth parents access to information that is currently sealed in their adoption records. For years, adoptees and birth parents have worked to get personal and family information from their original birth certificates and adoption records. Ontario's new law will help adoptees find out what their original names were, as well as who their birth parents were. It could also help birth parents learn the name their child was given after he or she was adopted.
The law includes:
* a new disclosure veto for adoptions that take place before Sept 1, 2008:
http://www.mcss.gov.on.ca/mcss/english/pillars/community/questions/adoption/about_adopt_disclose_sys.htm
* no contact notices for all adoptions registered in Ontario:
http://www.gov.on.ca/ont/portal/!ut/p/.cmd/cs/.ce/7_0_A/.s/7_0_252/_s.7_0_A/7_0_252/_l/en?docid=STEL02_160608 or http://tinyurl.com/2pjroq
Adoptees and birth parents can begin to apply for disclosure vetoes in September 2008. Adoptees and birth parents will be able to apply for information from their adoption records starting in June 2009.
Quotes
"For many, the bond between parent and child continues far beyond the adoption process. So does the need to know your identity," said Minister of Community and Social Services Madeleine Meilleur. "Now our adoption laws finally recognize that reality."
"This act will have a profound impact on thousands of people who have been longing for years, often decades, to know their roots or the names of their children," said Wendy Rowney from the Coalition for Open Adoption Records.
"Finally, as adults, we can make private, responsible decisions regarding contact."
QUICK FACTS
- Approximately 250,000 adoption orders have been filed in Ontario since
1921,
http://www.mcss.gov.on.ca/mcss/english/pillars/community/questions/adoption/about_adopt_disclose_sys.htm
- Almost 75,000 people have registered with Ontario's voluntary Adoption
Disclosure Register since 1979, searching for information about their birth
relatives,
http://www.gov.on.ca/ont/portal/!ut/p/.cmd/cs/.ce/7_0_A/.s/7_0_252/_s.7_0_A/7_0_252/_l/en?docid=STEL02_160616 or http://tinyurl.com/5nuogm
Ontario is the fifth Canadian province to open its adoption records. The others are:
* British Columbia, http://www.vs.gov.bc.ca/adoption/releas_adopt.html
* Alberta, http://child.alberta.ca/home/602.cfm
* Manitoba, http://www.gov.mb.ca/fs/childfam/registry.html
* Newfoundland & Labrador, http://www.gs.gov.nl.ca/gs/vs/adoption-records.stm
The United Kingdom has open adoption records, http://www.gro.gov.uk/gro/content/adoptions/adoptioncontactregister
Several states in Australia also have open adoption records, eg New South Wales, http://www.community.nsw.gov.au/DOCS/STANDARD/PC_101095.htm
LEARN MORE
Visit ServiceOntario to learn more about services and information for adoptees and birth relatives
http://www.gov.on.ca/ont/portal/!ut/p/.cmd/cs/.ce/7_0_A/.s/7_0_252/_s.7_0_A/7_0_252/_l/en?docid=STEL02_160609 or http://tinyurl.com/5u9f6n
SOURCE: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DonorSiblingRegistry
|
|
| Government rejects bid to restrict donor contact |
[18 Dec 2007|10:29pm] |
Government rejects bid to restrict donor contact
THE AGE
Carol Nader
December 18, 2007
SPERM and egg donors will still be permitted to initiate contact with children they helped conceive, after the State Government rejected the recommendation of a report it commissioned that the law be overthrown.
In Victoria, anyone who donated sperm or eggs that were used in the conception of children born from July 1988 onwards can apply to the Infertility Treatment Authority for information about the child. Once the child turns 18, the authority is required to write to them, requesting consent to release identifying information to the donor. But there are concerns that people who are not aware of their genetic origins would face possible trauma upon learning of their history. Studies have shown only about a third of parents tell their children how they were conceived.
The first people affected by the law turned 18 last year. The authority launched a public awareness campaign, encouraging parents to tell their children and offering support.
The Victorian Law Reform Commission in its report argued it would be "intrusive and unenforceable" to legally oblige parents to inform their children of their genetic origins.
It recommended that only children be allowed to initiate contact, but donors should have a 12-month period to apply for information. It said donors should be encouraged to tell authorities if they became aware of a genetic condition that might have been transmitted and the information would be passed on.
The Government last week announced it would make surrogacy available and ease restrictions on single women and lesbians to access fertility treatment. But it won't accept the commission's recommendation about sperm and egg donors' access to information.
A spokesman for Health Minister Daniel Andrews said: "There have been a number of changes over a period of time in this area. To change the laws again would be confusing and destabilising."
Melbourne IVF clinic medical director John McBain has been trying to persuade the Government to repeal the law and intends to write to Mr Andrews.
Dr McBain said by refusing to change the law, the Government was effectively frightening people into telling their children about how they were conceived.
The authority has so far received fewer than 10 applications from donors requesting information about children who have turned 18. Chief executive Louise Johnson said donors making the applications to date had been sensitive.
|
|
| Online sperm donors are legally responsible for resulting children (UK) |
[23 Nov 2007|07:04pm] |
Online sperm donors are legally responsible for resulting children (UK)
By James Randerson. The Guardian. November 20, 2007
A Guardian investigation yesterday exposed two unlicensed online companies that could be breaking the law by delivering fresh sperm to customers from anonymous donors. According to fertility experts, the service puts women at risk because tests on donors for sexually transmitted infections like HIV are not as rigorous as those that would happen in conventional sperm donor clinics. But there is more to this story...
There was not space in the paper to go into the implications for sperm donors - and if you are thinking of donating to one of these internet sperm operations you should certainly read on.
Here's the service in a nutshell. Via its website, First4Fertility recruits both potential donors and women who wish to conceive using an anonymous donor. For the women, the deal is not cheap (I know because the Guardian went to the trouble of ordering some sperm from First4Fertility). You pay an £80 [US $165] registration fee, followed by a £300 [US $620] "introductory fee", which entitles you to use the service for 30 days. On top of that each delivery costs £150 [US $310].
Once you have handed over the cash you get to pick a donor from a pool of local men who have registered. You don't know their names or addresses, but you get quite a bit of info about their interests, education, occupation, motivations for donating and even their date of birth.
Once you have arranged a mutually convenient time, the donation arrives courtesy of First4Fertility's "dedicated courier company", courierbid.co.uk, in a plastic sample pot with a large plastic syringe and instructions.
According to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, this amounts to "procuring sperm" - something that is expressly forbidden in an amendment to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act, which came into effect on July 5. The HFEA has written to both companies telling them to cease operations relating to sperm procurement or delivery.
Both companies deny any wrongdoing. Nigel Woodforth, one of First4Fertility's directors, said: "We provide a donor database from which both people looking for sperm donors and sperm donors can communicate and if they choose to do so, come to a private arrangement over home insemination. We do not provide and would not provide any services which were illegal or unlawful." In a statement, courierbid.co.uk said. "We do not procure or arrange deliveries... courier companies do not fall under the regulation which you mention and therefore we are in no way acting unlawfully."
Online sperm donation might seem like a pretty good gig - once some initial health checks have been completed, you receive £50 [US $150] per donation, which is supposed to cover expenses (it is illegal to pay sperm donors). Leaving aside the question of whether such a large payment (potentially repeated a few times per month) is a financial incentive, the company is also misleading its donors about their responsibilities.
When we approached First4fertility posing as a prospective sperm recipient they told us that the company will guarantee anonymity for both parties. "We do not allow contact between donor and recipient as most donors would not donate if their anonymity was lost," said Mr Woodforth. When we approached the company separately as a sperm donor, another director, Ricky Gage, was also adamant that a child would not be legally entitled to know who the sperm donor was. "We are 100% sure that the law does not apply."
But according to the HFEA, men who donate sperm under these circumstances do have a responsibility to any children that result: "The law says that men donating sperm through licensed fertility clinics are not the legal father of any child born through that donation. Men giving out their sperm in any other way - such as via internet arrangements - are legally the father of any children born with all the responsibilities that carries." In other words, different rules apply to donations made through fertility clinics and those made online. So if you donate sperm online and the mother of a resulting child tracked you down, you could be held financially responsible for its upbringing.
I'd be interested to hear your views - particularly if you have had any personal involvement with these particular companies or similar ones. (http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/11/internet_sperm.html)
source: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SpermDonors/
|
|
| Fears for children of donors |
[08 Oct 2007|02:43pm] |
October 03, 2007.
source: http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,22521312-2682,00.html
People born from sperm donations could commit incest with brothers or sisters they have no way of knowing, an advocate for donor registries says.
Leonie Hewitt, a Sydney mother of three donor children, was in Adelaide yesterday to call on the State Government to implement a sperm donor registry. She has discovered one of her children has 28 half-siblings from the same father and 20 of them probably are in South Australia. "Adelaide is a big country town. My concern is that one of them could enter a relationship with one of their half-siblings. There is a risk for people who are out there dating or in the nightclub scene."
Victoria has a voluntary registry where sperm, egg or embryo donors - or the offspring of donors - can share information. "All the states need to have their own register," Ms Hewitt said.
Health Minister John Hill said if donors have signed consent forms, children can obtain their details from the donor clinic. He also said the current laws were being re-examined. "Each state has a different set of arrangements in the area. For example, in Victoria there is a central register while in some other states clinics keep a register. The Standing Committee of Attorneys General is considering how the law governing donor conception can be harmonised, so that one set of rules governs all Australian jurisdictions."
Ms Hewitt, recognised with an OAM [Medal of the Order of Australia] for her work with the Donor Conception Support Group, http://www.dcsg.org.au outlined other issues facing donor offspring. They can be missing crucial information about their medical histories, genetic tendencies towards cancer and other family characteristics. Ms Hewitt said the risks were even higher for people who were born from donor embryos, or "genetic orphans", who do not have any information about their genes at all. She said access to this type of knowledge was a "human rights issue" and that donors were receptive to the idea. "I've probably spoken to a thousand donors in all the years I've been doing this and I could literally count on one hand how many didn't want their information known."
|
|
| navigation |
| [ |
viewing |
| |
most recent entries |
] |
| [ |
go |
| |
earlier |
] |
|
|
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/community.gif){kind=small}
we_are_dcp