RSS
Quantitatively, artificial insemination is a big deal by now, with perhaps a couple of million Americans having been conceived the new-fangled way. I haven’t much looked into it since reviewing David Plotz’s 2005 book about the Nobel Prize Sperm Bank, but the sperm bank side of the industry always struck me as a little slapdash.
There are the periodic scandals involving fertility doctors who father scores of children, but then are the questions like: how reliable are reported SAT scores of donors? The New York Times reports today that basic quality control — getting the right test tube — is sometimes shoddy.
Their Children Were Conceived With Donated Sperm. It Was the Wrong Sperm.
As genetic testing becomes more widespread, parents are finding that sperm used in artificial insemination did not come from the donors they chose.By Jacqueline Mroz
June 3, 2019… There are no national statistics on the number of children born through artificial insemination each year, although some experts have estimated the number may be as high as 60,000. And no one tracks the number of people who find that the sperm they purchased is not from the donor they chose.
But in the age of consumer DNA testing, the anecdotes are piling up. Increasing numbers of parents, or sometimes their donor-conceived children, are discovering that the wrong sperm was provided by a sperm bank or fertility clinic often decades after the fact.
The constant trickle of cases is raising tough questions about whether sperm banks and fertility clinics ought to be better regulated.
Has any firm developed an outstanding reputation as the gold standard for quality?
Regulation can sometimes help an industry. For example, Elizur Wright, one of those titanically energetic 19th Century post-Puritan reformers, is the father of the American life insurance industry because he was the father of life insurance regulation. A self-trained actuary, he did the calculations that changed the life insurance business from something between a fiasco and a scam into a science.
“These stories are extraordinarily heart-wrenching and really challenging for the law,” said Dov Fox, director of the Center for Health Law Policy and Bioethics at the University of San Diego. “They’re also far more common than we know.”
“Sperm banks are very lightly regulated, and these kinds of switches or mix-ups aren’t altogether unforeseeable when you learn of the number of sperm banks using outdated methods of labeling specimens, such as pen and paper,” he added. …
There are few legal remedies for parents who receive the wrong sperm, Melissa learned.
“I wasn’t interested in trying to sue, because I love my daughter,” she said. “Also, I’d have to sue for wrongful birth, and if there is no health issue involved, then there’s no wrongdoing on their part.”
Jennifer Cramblett of Uniontown, Ohio, filed suit against Midwest Sperm Bank in 2014, in the Chicago area, after learning that she and her female partner had mistakenly been given sperm from the wrong donor.
Indeed, the couple’s child was clearly biracial, although the donor they’d selected was white. Sperm vial numbers at the bank were written in pen and ink, and the facility’s records were not computerized, the suit claimed.
But the judge threw out the case, saying it was not a “wrongful birth” because Ms. Cramblett’s child had no health problems.
While clients like her may believe that getting the wrong sperm is fraud, courts have long maintained that there is no injury if the child is healthy.
“A court could say, you didn’t get the donor you wanted, but how can you say that you’re worse off? How do you know that one donor is better than the other?” said Sonia Suter, a law professor at George Washington University who specializes in bioethics and health policy.
“There isn’t a legal mechanism here to address what seems to be a clear wrong,” she added. …
Legal changes may be coming, prompted in part by a profoundly disturbing case.
In the 1970s and 1980s, a fertility doctor in Indianapolis used his own sperm, rather than a husband’s sperm or that of an anonymous donor, to impregnate at least 46 women.
Dr. Donald Cline pleaded guilty to two felony obstruction of justice charges and admitted that he lied to state investigators about using his own sperm to inseminate patients. He surrendered his medical license and was given a one-year suspended sentence.
State prosecutors said they weren’t able to press for a tougher sentence because there were no state laws prohibiting this conduct.
Sixty people now believe this former doctor is their biological father, based on DNA testing. …
Mr. White and some of his recently discovered half-siblings pushed to make “fertility fraud” a felony in Indiana. The measure was signed into law by the governor earlier this month.
The law covers cases of deception that involve a medical procedure, drug or human reproductive material, such as sperm, eggs or embryos. A conviction is punishable by six months to 2 1/2 years in prison, with a fine of up to $10,000.
The law makes Indiana one of the few states to regulate donor conception. …
But Dr. Fox, the law professor, thinks the laws should go further. He has proposed a new concept: “confounded procreation.”
I don’t exactly know what “confounded procreation” means, but it’s helpful for Sapir-Whorf reasons to have new terms. This is a pretty good example of an issue where everybody recognizes that something isn’t right, but the legal system hasn’t had the words to articulate the problem, so nothing much gets done about it. Now, though, Dr. Fox comes up with “confounded procreation” and we can nod our heads and point to it as what we’re talking about.
Courts would recognize the loss when reproductive choices are confounded, or compromised, by the negligence or wrongdoing of others.
In an early test of this concept, the Supreme Court of Singapore in 2017 heard a case involving sperm that was accidentally switched by a fertility clinic, resulting in a couple having a child of mixed race.
The court described a new kind of loss — a loss of “genetic affinity” — and awarded the couple 30 percent of the costs of raising the child, about $233,000.
Caring about donor DNA is racist!!! All DNA is created equal.
I used to know a woman who had child by a sperm donor in California (Stanford undergrad donor apparently), and she went to a sperm donor mothers’ meet up and said it was like being at a Himmler reunion with all the blonde haired and blue eyed children.
A proper Teutoneugenics could easily beat the cost and emotional pain of Daily Neymaring.
Weihan Zhang link not working. Has be finally been banned?
Who knew that solving infertility would lead to problems?
Inconceivable!!
Haven’t I read that about 4% of children were fathered by someone other than the husband? Did these men have their procreation confounded? Will they receive anything? Who would pay it? The wife? The backdoor man?
A generation ago there may have been suspicion, but no certainty. Now, all secrets will be revealed, sooner or later.
Everything that American doctors and hospitals do is shoddy, and lacks QC. A neighbor told me that the doctors missed her husband’s broken aorta, and let him die in the ER. Subsequently, when she asked for an autopsy, so that she can sue their asses, they asked for a few thousand dollars. She was skint, and insurance would not cover it. So nobody knows for sure if it was ruptured aorta, or heart attack, or anything else, and she can’t sue. (Not to mention the state has a ridiculously low cap on hospital and physician penalties.)
Surprisingly, the much maligned drug industry costs less than hospital bills, less than doctor salaries (which are billed separately), and is the only field where safety and efficacy evidence is required.
Now, artificial insemination is done by doctors. Sloppiness is built in.
But in the Stupid State of Kansas, you may want to think twice before helping out:Kansas is really, really stupid.
Nice to see they recognize affinity doesn’t imply supremacy. Most of the US suffers from this loss, but we have no legal recourse.
But since race isn’t a valid scientific construct (thank you Ms. Saini), how could the fact that a baby was ‘mixed-race’ tell them anything about genetic affinity?
It’s pretty horrible that we cannot even ask as simple a thing as wanting a child who resembles us.
This horrible inhuman “anti-racist” ideology suppresses and criminalizes this most basic of human desires.
What the hell is wrong with these people. The most important thing in life--heck the very purpose and defintion of biological life--which normal people have understood for thousands, hundreds of thousands of years ... seems to be beyond our lawyer elite.
This is pretty odious:
It seems to me that if the fallacy of the blank slate was more widely understood then adoption would drop and obtaining high quality sperm and/or eggs would be more carefully controlled. People imagine that they can raise a kid of arbitrary background to be “theirs” and have it turn out like them.
I feel bad for friends who adopted kids and are now having trouble with them. These days pretty much only white trash moms are adopting out kids and well-meaning adoptive parents don’t know the trouble they’re getting into.
If you are a woman who wants a sperm donor, you can find plenty of willing + eager men to pick from and choose exactly what you want, regardless of what politicians say
This horrible inhuman "anti-racist" ideology suppresses and criminalizes this most basic of human desires.
The resolution of all this will be that Jews and darker-skinned people have a legitimate legal interest in procreating with their co-ethnics if they so choose. Non-Jewish whites will not have any such legitimate interest, because that would be just like Hitler.
Yes, many have. And they’re getting better all the time:
How Prized Bull Semen And DNA Testing Are Reshaping America’s Beef Herd
The USDA keeps sharp watch over the industry:
HEALTH CERTIFICATE FOR EXPORTATION OF BOVINE SEMEN FROM UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA
Imports: Sheep and Goat (Live, Semen and Embryos)
Oh… You mean people…
Never mind. I thought it was something important.
Inconceivable!!
Ow.
You really need to reexamine your working definition of “science.” To take a somewhat shoddily ran industry and tighten it up is not science, it is technique. What you’re saying is like claiming that a kid who picks up his dirty clothes, washes them, folds them, and puts them away is transforming wardrobe management from a fiasco into a science. Actual science (i.e. the contemplation of causality) does not enter into these things.
The only regulation that could possibly benefit the horrific artificial insemination business would be its complete abolition. The very existence of such a thing is an abomination.
The constant trickle
Phrasing!
What does it matter what donor sperm is used?
Everyone knows there is just one race – the human race.
Blank slate and all that.
What’s that you say?
You mean SJW affluent White women actually *care* about the sperm they get despite making the above statements ad nauseum? They say one thing and do another?
[Clutches pearls]
I’m shocked! Shocked I tell you!
Inside the breast of every SJW beats the heart of a tyrant.
Didn’t these people get an amniocentesis? That would have given them the DNA information they needed.
In the long run, pretty much everyone is going to get their DNA tested, especially kids whose birth parents are not their biological parents, because they are curious about their heritage and genetic diseases and often can't get this information any other way. The era of anonymous sperm donation is coming to an end. A lot of kids already know who their donor is or will know when they become 18. Donors are more willing to accept that their offspring are going to want to have contact with them, not in the sense of being financially responsible for their college tuition but in a sort of " friendly uncle", send Christmas cards role. This seems to work just fine and all the secrecy that surrounded the procedure in the past was completely unnecessary. The only real unfairness is that donors in the past were promised anonymity but technology and changes in society have changed the terms of the deal on them.
I can understand that if you pay for a white donor and your kid comes out black, that’s a real problem and you should be able to sue for that (even though you’ve just increased your kid’s chances of becoming POTUS). But I’m having trouble understanding what the real damages are when the doctor uses his own sperm instead of donor sperm and you have a healthy and intelligent kid – what are the damages? How should that be a felony with years in prison attached? Yes, it’s a form of consumer fraud, but it’s like you ordered a Kenwood stereo and Amazon sent you a Yamaha of equal value instead – yes, you didn’t get exactly what you ordered but what you got was of equal value. There should be some small penalty for the substitution to discourage fraud but it’s not the end of the world.
On what legal theory? And what would the damages be?
Reg Cæsar's bull semen industry comparison is revealing.
BTW, I wonder how many of the "accidents" are truly accidental. Can't you just imagine some SJW tech laughing while sticking it to the "racists" who had the temerity to specify they wanted sperm from a white?
1) Legally, there have been stories where such cases couldn't really be argued; one argument used by the victims was that the kid was "damaged due to the racism of the community," i.e. they had to shit all over their (probably nice and decidedly non-racist) neighborhood to be able to sue. And even so, the jury might decide that the kid suffered no harm at all. (Because, the damage to the parents - that the kid didn't resemble them - didn't even come into play.)
2) It's also difficult to do so, because your kid might find out that you were suing because he turned out... wrong.
So huge penalties should be the norm without a lawsuit.
I guess almost any crime can be rationalized if you can’t quantify material harm as measured by shekels — “Hey, that chick was totally passed out cold when I banged her and admits she can’t remember anything. And I’m disease free and used a condom. So what’s the big deal?”
Also consider the view of the donor; he has some expectation of an honest contract.
I think people are thrown off by looking at the baby as the "product" that you bought. You are really contracting (and paying quite a bit), for a service which will allow you to have some input and control and knowledge of your child's provenance. It's the failure to deliver on that promise that is the core harm. Quantifying the damage is hard, but that's true in lots of areas of the law. That's what judges and juries are for.
Some people might be really motivated by this and it could be worth quite a lot to them. Others would be happy to sign up for the cut-rate "mystery sperm special." Ideally, it would be addressed in the contract from the get-go.
Well Jack, i'll admit you're an upgrade from the judge whose metric for humans was "healthy" vs. "unhealthy".
The JackD metric is:
-- healthy vs. unhealthy
-- white vs. black
-- intelligent vs. stupid.
Here's the anwser to your question: "Because the woman signed up to be impregnated with the sperm of a *particular* donor." Or a donor with some particular set of characteristics. It actually is not JackD's choice to decide what particular characteristics of the sperm are important and of "equal value". And pregnancy--having a child--isn't a stereo it's the most thing in life.
Personally, i've felt my whole life that a lot of women make poor choices about who to get impregnated by ... they don't choose me! Heck, if all these black women out there would stop getting knocked up by DeShitavious and get impregnated with my sperm instead, America's race problem would be at an end. The next generations of blacks would be much whiter, much better looking and have an average IQ above the white mean. (Ok--i'm half Irish--so maybe the criminality thing would still be outlier.) But bizarrely, black women keep letting themselves get knocked up by DeShawn or Jalen or Jamal ... with the expected outcome.
If i insisted that any woman make "the superior choice" to use AnotherDad sperm ... they'd toss my ass in jail--even though their child would be better off.
James Aggeles, who donated his sperm to Georgia-based Xytex Corp. and fathered 36 children between 2000 and 2014. He billed himself as a highly intelligent donor working toward a PhD in neuroscience engineering, but he was actually a college dropout diagnosed with schizophrenia and narcissistic personality disorder who has spent time behind bars for burglary,
According to the sperm bank, he was the “perfect donor" , academically accomplished and musically gifted. The donor’s profile states he has an IQ of 160, bachelor’s and master’s degrees in neuroscience and is pursuing a PhD. He has received international acclaim for his talent as a musician...Included in the profile is a six-page health questionnaire that asks whether he or any blood relative has any of 143 medical conditions. He answers no to all. Specifically asked if he has schizophrenia or manic depression (bipolar disorder), he responds “no.”
can these families litigate against the fraud perpetrated against them ? No
https://www.courthousenews.com/no-such-thing-as-wrongful-birth-in-georgia/
Thus Sperm banks can give women sperm from homeless crazy people and the recipients have no legal standing , even when they lie and claim to give you sperm from a college professor with no history of mental illness.
I can understand that if you pay for a white donor and your kid comes out black, that’s a real problem and you should be able to sue for that
On what legal theory? And what would the damages be?
Breach of contract. If I pay a painter to paint my house green and teal, and he paints it rust and red, that's breach of contract.
Interesting to me is the difference in empathy given women duped into raising children from sperm from someone they didn’t expect vs. that given men duped into raising children from sperm from someone they didn’t expect. To the former we think it a huge injustice. To the later we say, “pay up.”
This is truly vile and a crime that is much, much worse than rape. It's akin to rape with pregnancy--stolen reproduction. But even that doesn't cover it, because in rape, the child is still the woman's. Basically this guy's reproductive capability--which is essentially providing support in return for a woman bearing and raising his child--is stolen. If an only child--completely stolen, his lineage destroyed, genocided.
Yet ... crickets.
The modern line on all the old sanctions for female adultery are "ancient barbaric patriarchy. Yet there is a clear reason for the seriousness, and it was not "unfair". It was in balance with the sanctions with rape. The basic idea in both cases--cheating on reproduction, stealing reproduction from people is serious business, akin to murder.
Amniocentesis is not done 100% of the time – there are risks and costs associated with it so it is not always justified. Even if it was done, they are screening for genetic diseases, not race or paternity (unless you ask them to). Normally there is no reason to suspect.
In the long run, pretty much everyone is going to get their DNA tested, especially kids whose birth parents are not their biological parents, because they are curious about their heritage and genetic diseases and often can’t get this information any other way. The era of anonymous sperm donation is coming to an end. A lot of kids already know who their donor is or will know when they become 18. Donors are more willing to accept that their offspring are going to want to have contact with them, not in the sense of being financially responsible for their college tuition but in a sort of ” friendly uncle”, send Christmas cards role. This seems to work just fine and all the secrecy that surrounded the procedure in the past was completely unnecessary. The only real unfairness is that donors in the past were promised anonymity but technology and changes in society have changed the terms of the deal on them.
This 2010 paper is fairly out of date but I am not aware of anything newer: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19342039
This 2018 paper is more about attitudes towards donor screening: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29426347
So maybe much later after the kid is no longer a kid.
The assumption of “equal value” is questionable. Going with your Kenwood and Yamaha analogy, what if they had very different feature sets? And that mattered to the purchaser? What breaks that analogy is the difference in ability to detect the substitution and return the product.
Reg Cæsar’s bull semen industry comparison is revealing.
BTW, I wonder how many of the “accidents” are truly accidental. Can’t you just imagine some SJW tech laughing while sticking it to the “racists” who had the temerity to specify they wanted sperm from a white?
In the long run, pretty much everyone is going to get their DNA tested, especially kids whose birth parents are not their biological parents, because they are curious about their heritage and genetic diseases and often can't get this information any other way. The era of anonymous sperm donation is coming to an end. A lot of kids already know who their donor is or will know when they become 18. Donors are more willing to accept that their offspring are going to want to have contact with them, not in the sense of being financially responsible for their college tuition but in a sort of " friendly uncle", send Christmas cards role. This seems to work just fine and all the secrecy that surrounded the procedure in the past was completely unnecessary. The only real unfairness is that donors in the past were promised anonymity but technology and changes in society have changed the terms of the deal on them.
Are donors commonly DNA tested at this point? That seems like a logical step. Even if they can’t release the sequences, a selection of PGS results and dangerous recessives would be valuable information. Perhaps critical depending on which recessive alleles the mother has.
This 2010 paper is fairly out of date but I am not aware of anything newer: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19342039
This 2018 paper is more about attitudes towards donor screening: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29426347
On a more fundamental level, given that sperm banks and fertility practices are small time operations, and there is no consolidated research about outcomes, do we really know that freezing sperm does not introduce mutations? Of course, a cancer epidemic would be traced back pretty quickly by this CDC. But would an average 5 — or 10 — point IQ decline due to sperm banking be even noticed, given the lack of longitudinal studies?
Serial sperm donor Ari Nagel, an American who has fathered 33 children, with 10 more on the way, has been banned from donating his sperm in Israel, Nagel recently learned that he could no longer donate sperm in Israel, and that the health ministry had banned the use of his sperm.
https://nypost.com/2018/06/16/israel-tries-to-ban-sperm-mega-donor-from-having-any-more-kids/
Seven new bundles of joy were born of his fruits in the past year — from The Bronx, Long Island, Harlem, Maryland, Orlando, Fla., and Staten Island
His wife of a decade, Roxanne, is “devastated” by the news and “had no idea this was happening,” the tipster said. Nagel now confesses that he is indeed married, adding that his wife is “livid,” and “she’s been yelling at me a lot.”
https://nypost.com/2016/06/19/sperm-donor-that-sired-22-kids-has-a-wife-and-shes-not-happy/
But you’re not really able to do that.
1) Legally, there have been stories where such cases couldn’t really be argued; one argument used by the victims was that the kid was “damaged due to the racism of the community,” i.e. they had to shit all over their (probably nice and decidedly non-racist) neighborhood to be able to sue. And even so, the jury might decide that the kid suffered no harm at all. (Because, the damage to the parents – that the kid didn’t resemble them – didn’t even come into play.)
2) It’s also difficult to do so, because your kid might find out that you were suing because he turned out… wrong.
So huge penalties should be the norm without a lawsuit.
Reg Cæsar's bull semen industry comparison is revealing.
BTW, I wonder how many of the "accidents" are truly accidental. Can't you just imagine some SJW tech laughing while sticking it to the "racists" who had the temerity to specify they wanted sperm from a white?
Yes, could be a white SJW or a black supremacist.
Picky picky picky. When you’re trying to get pregnant by a perfect stranger, stop being so choosy.
Anyway, if your sperm count is low, go look at what’s making it low and do something about it. Low sperm counts don’t happen for no reason.
Worried he’d never have a family, Louis became a prolific sperm donor, hoping that his children would one day track him down. ‘I thought – who will remember me?’: the man who fathered 200 children.
Louis was on a secret mission, motivated by a deep anxiety that had built as he drifted through early adulthood. Profound questions of mortality were keeping him awake at night. “I had started to think, ‘Who will remember me when I’m gone? Who will talk about me? Who will be my heir?’” So Louis made an audacious plan. If he wasn’t going to have children of his own in the normal way, maybe he could donate sperm in such quantity that – eventually – a child might try to find him. To pull it off, Louis would need to play a biological numbers game. “If I had 10 children this way, there would be a very slim chance of success,” he says. “But what if I had 100… or even more?”
For 20 years, from 1982, Louis donated as often as three times a week. He says the banks must have known he was visiting too often, but demand for reliable donors was high: Louis was an asset, he exaggerated his credentials in the anonymous profile for prospective mothers. “It said I was university-educated, that I was a boss at a bank and that I had no interest in being contacted by future children,” he says. It also failed to mention his ethnicity; Louis describes his father as “black and white – we descend from African slaves and their owners”.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/nov/24/sperm-donor-man-who-fathered-200-children
Here we have another example of the Narrative Shapers admitting that DNA matters and that race is very biologically constructed.
I wonder why they are suddenly allowing more of this kind of information to slip out? Is there going to be some kind of a narrative shift? Are we going from “there’s no such thing as race” to “race is real and white is the worst race”? As it is now, the illogical narrative line is “there is no race, but the worst race is white.” Are they just tightening up their logic, or are there other reasons?
Also, I’m not going to try to find out, but I wonder how many of these sloppy sperm shops are run by doctors named Patel, Chang, Muhammed or Abromov? Come to think of it, running Dr. Fong’s Fly-by-Night Discount Sperm Shack is a pretty good way to make a lot of money fast, and then high-tail it back to the home country while leaving 100 little Dr. Fong’s behind (cost of goods: zero).
O Ho grasshopper, a new thing indeed.
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/59efbd48d7bdce7ee2a7d0c4/t/59f127201dd45421fc345e01/1508980189428/11767800513_6f4115f2c1_o.jpg?format=500w
Excellent, sir!
Call me a bad person, but when the story of the two white lesbians having a black baby came out, I laughed.
Stick to suing Christian bakers, girls.
You Don’t always get what you want even with a donor IQ of 160
https://www.thestar.com/life/health_wellness/2016/04/09/he-was-the-perfect-sperm-donor-then-26-families-found-out-he-wasnt.html
This horrible inhuman "anti-racist" ideology suppresses and criminalizes this most basic of human desires.
Lawyers suck.
I’m sorry the pathetically low quality of “thought” from the “profession” that claims to be sucking in our “best and brightest” from the verbal side is appalling.
These are people who can find a right to abortion in the Constitution or can find a “tort” against states from tobacco companies. (An open fraud: lawyers to loot billions of what are essentially tobacco taxes, then give payoffs to the politicians–mostly Democrats–enabling the fraud.)
And they can’t figure out huge fraud and tort is perpetrated when a sperm bank impregnates a woman with the wrong sperm?
Apparently judges think babies come in two flavors–“healthy” and “not healthy”. Would these lawyers be ok with it if they went to the auto dealer and bought an Escalade and the attendent pulled up with a freshly scrubbed and waxed Subaru. It’s got wheels and runs!
Do these lawyer people have any idea–given any *thought* to why societies have historically punished rape so severely. Hint: it isn’t because a five minutes of in-out, in-out is a terrible, terrible injury.
Do they not understand the idea–the intense derision–of a cuckhold. And why the alt-right has made “cuck” an effective–spot on–political insult.
Don’t these very same lawyers tag men with huge, ten, fifteen, twenty year “child support” payments, because a woman’s child–whom they often don’t even have any right raise, nor sometimes even any enforceable right to even see–is “theirs”.
What the hell is wrong with these people. The most important thing in life–heck the very purpose and defintion of biological life–which normal people have understood for thousands, hundreds of thousands of years … seems to be beyond our lawyer elite.
As a society we'd be much better off putting our "best and brightest" to work in the sciences and business. But as long as there is big bucks in using the legal system to allocate resources people who are good at it will be in high demand.
You aware of the demographics of those two makes?
Racist!
Lawyers are supposed to be able to argue any side of any issue, and be the so-called devil’s advocate. The problem is with the judges and juries who are increasingly prone to accept these arguments.
What the hell is wrong with these people. The most important thing in life--heck the very purpose and defintion of biological life--which normal people have understood for thousands, hundreds of thousands of years ... seems to be beyond our lawyer elite.
What is the most important thing in life?
This explains the appeal of the legal profession.
What did her bastard look like?
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/59efbd48d7bdce7ee2a7d0c4/t/59f127201dd45421fc345e01/1508980189428/11767800513_6f4115f2c1_o.jpg?format=500w
Cattle have value; because of the 13th Amendment, people don’t.
It’s major professional fraud in a rather intimate, some would say sacred, aspect of life. The doc denied his patients the choice of bearing his children or not. The sentence should be 20 years in prison or castration.
I guess almost any crime can be rationalized if you can’t quantify material harm as measured by shekels — “Hey, that chick was totally passed out cold when I banged her and admits she can’t remember anything. And I’m disease free and used a condom. So what’s the big deal?”
This horrible inhuman "anti-racist" ideology suppresses and criminalizes this most basic of human desires.
Agree.
This is pretty odious:
If the kid ends up one of sixty half-siblings, that would be an issue.
Also consider the view of the donor; he has some expectation of an honest contract.
Eww.
What, specifically, is wrong with “outdated methods of labeling specimens, such as pen and paper”?
Every blood or urine sample I have ever given in a doctor’s office was in a container with a pen-and-paper stick-on label. What alternative system of tracking samples is superior?
This is the kind of thing that happens when you put vibrant people into the chain of custody. Lately Amazon has had a problem with its vibrant "independent contractor" delivery drivers - they will deliver a package, take a picture of it on the customer's door step, then go right back and steal it. Somehow it doesn't occur to them that lots of people now have security cameras.
OTOH, I'm also amazed at how many porch pirates nowadays are white trash types - I assume mostly opiate addicts.
I was a sperm donor in my 20s. They told me a lot of cancers aren’t particularly heritable and are therefore not relevant. I had one grandfather die of cancer in late middle age which they said was not disqualifying.
Also, I sort of felt compelled to mention my significantly larger than normal genitals in the screening process, but decided that would make me sound creepy and didn’t…so that’s a bonus someone will potentially end up with.
It seems primarily like a breach of contract issue if it’s negligence, and fraud if it’s an intentional bad act. I don’t see why those legal theories don’t cover it already.
I think people are thrown off by looking at the baby as the “product” that you bought. You are really contracting (and paying quite a bit), for a service which will allow you to have some input and control and knowledge of your child’s provenance. It’s the failure to deliver on that promise that is the core harm. Quantifying the damage is hard, but that’s true in lots of areas of the law. That’s what judges and juries are for.
Some people might be really motivated by this and it could be worth quite a lot to them. Others would be happy to sign up for the cut-rate “mystery sperm special.” Ideally, it would be addressed in the contract from the get-go.
Maybe the doctors in question were not the most handsome fellows but usually doctors are pretty smart so probably (whether they knew it or not) the parent were better off with his sperm than with the handsome Aryan looking guy in the catalog. God likes to play little tricks on us anyway so that the people who sign up for the beefy square jawed dad end up having a daughter that takes after her dad.
Mostly I think it's just legal/epistemological/metaphysical Gordian Knot crossed with a Tar Baby, so courts don't want to touch it and they just hope the plaintiffs will go away and let them get beck to easier cases. Either that or the legislature will pass some law they can just apply without too much effort.
Back in the OJ murder trial one of the jurors was dismissed for being seen talking to a witness. He talked to reporters about the case and he said that he would have dismissed the value of the DNA crime scene evidence in deliberations. “That don’t mean nothing. Everybody got that DNA stuff.”
Because any doctor who would use his own sperm instead of that from a donor would have some psychopath tendencies, and most women would not want to have such a person as the father of their child.
On the other hand, anyone who’s willing to be a sperm donor to any woman out there and forgo having a relationship with his child might have some psychopathic tendencies, as well.
What the hell is wrong with these people. The most important thing in life--heck the very purpose and defintion of biological life--which normal people have understood for thousands, hundreds of thousands of years ... seems to be beyond our lawyer elite.
That’s the thing about lawyers — both sides have them. So “brilliant” lawyers tend to cancel each other out. Or, occasionally one of the lawyers is so brilliant he can convince a judge or jury to do something cosmically stupid.
As a society we’d be much better off putting our “best and brightest” to work in the sciences and business. But as long as there is big bucks in using the legal system to allocate resources people who are good at it will be in high demand.
We live in a female run society. If men ran things paternity and DNA would be that of the husband. Now women seem to be sliding towards the bull semen type market. Removing sex and marriage from procreation.
Makes most White men redundant. A few studs to provide seven the rest steers for slaughter. Tell me again how White men and women have the same interest?
You don’t see Black or Asian or Hispanics with sperm donors. A 100% White woman phenom.
1) Legally, there have been stories where such cases couldn't really be argued; one argument used by the victims was that the kid was "damaged due to the racism of the community," i.e. they had to shit all over their (probably nice and decidedly non-racist) neighborhood to be able to sue. And even so, the jury might decide that the kid suffered no harm at all. (Because, the damage to the parents - that the kid didn't resemble them - didn't even come into play.)
2) It's also difficult to do so, because your kid might find out that you were suing because he turned out... wrong.
So huge penalties should be the norm without a lawsuit.
Hey, no problem if the kid comes out the wrong color. Just make sure you deliver in Virginia. Quick conversation with the mother, no harm no foul.
I think people are thrown off by looking at the baby as the "product" that you bought. You are really contracting (and paying quite a bit), for a service which will allow you to have some input and control and knowledge of your child's provenance. It's the failure to deliver on that promise that is the core harm. Quantifying the damage is hard, but that's true in lots of areas of the law. That's what judges and juries are for.
Some people might be really motivated by this and it could be worth quite a lot to them. Others would be happy to sign up for the cut-rate "mystery sperm special." Ideally, it would be addressed in the contract from the get-go.
I doubt it. Egg donation is very expensive (and invasive to the donor) but sperm donation is cheap. The amount that the donor receives (a couple of hundred $ at best) is a very small part of the overall cost. You are going to spend maybe $1 million raising a kid so it doesn’t make any sense to try to save $100 up front.
Maybe the doctors in question were not the most handsome fellows but usually doctors are pretty smart so probably (whether they knew it or not) the parent were better off with his sperm than with the handsome Aryan looking guy in the catalog. God likes to play little tricks on us anyway so that the people who sign up for the beefy square jawed dad end up having a daughter that takes after her dad.
‘Constant trickle of cases’.
There are thousands and thousands of sperm donors out there. They can’t all be psychopaths. Maybe this is something that doesn’t appeal to you personally but they perform a valuable service for infertile couples (of course nowadays they also perform more questionable services for lesbians, single mothers, etc.) and they are not considered to be psychopaths by society.
Also, I sort of felt compelled to mention my significantly larger than normal genitals in the screening process, but decided that would make me sound creepy and didn't...so that's a bonus someone will potentially end up with.
The name checks out.
Once upon a time, the UK police raided and closed down an ‘illegal sperm trading ring’.
A down market UK tabloid got wind of this and used the immortal headline ‘Dixon of Cock Cream’ * to feature the story.
* Dixon of Dock Green – exceptionally long running BBC police drama, (1950s to 1970s), starring the octogenarian Jack Warner as PC George Dixon.
Well, I guess the occasional cock-up made every now and then is a small price to pay…
This explains the appeal of the legal profession.
Also, I sort of felt compelled to mention my significantly larger than normal genitals in the screening process, but decided that would make me sound creepy and didn't...so that's a bonus someone will potentially end up with.
They probably needed donors and didn’t give a damn whether that was true or not. What happens to that kid 50 years from now is not their problem anyway. Now we know a lot more about DNA (although still not enough) – some cancers are definitely driven by genetics. That being said, if you live long enough almost everyone develops a cancer somewhere (although not necessarily a lethal one) and everyone dies of something.
Didn’t you write about an Ohio lesbian couple who tried to send their artificial insemination twins back after they turned about 1 and a half because it had become clear they were actually black ?
Every blood or urine sample I have ever given in a doctor's office was in a container with a pen-and-paper stick-on label. What alternative system of tracking samples is superior?
There’s nothing wrong with a pen and paper system – some places are going back to paper ballots because they are a hell of a lot more traceable than electronic votes. Since the vials are kept in liquid nitrogen I could see problems with label adhesives coming loose but I’m guessing that most of these switcheroos were either intentional sabotage (maybe with a racial revenge motive) or else gross negligence where some labels fall off and instead of being blamed for the loss, some employee just sticks them back on randomly knowing that they’ll never be caught. The common thread, I would be willing to bet, is that the lab had some “vibrant” employees in all cases.
This is the kind of thing that happens when you put vibrant people into the chain of custody. Lately Amazon has had a problem with its vibrant “independent contractor” delivery drivers – they will deliver a package, take a picture of it on the customer’s door step, then go right back and steal it. Somehow it doesn’t occur to them that lots of people now have security cameras.
OTOH, I’m also amazed at how many porch pirates nowadays are white trash types – I assume mostly opiate addicts.
Real world example. Only a couple months ago my wife made a connection with a neighbor lady who honestly we both did not much care for until then (she has a somewhat grating personality and is a busybody) when the neighbor lady confessed her two children (boy and girl) were conceived by donor eggs and that she was terrified the girl was going to soon figure out she was not her genetic mom as they look very different and I assume have different personalities. The neighbor mom is to be truthful a bit dumpy while the girl seems likely to grow up into a lovely looking young lady. So even something as minor as beauty, hair coloring, fairness of skin, etc. sets the stage for family conflict.
White women know this, and despite the received image of them as EAT, PRAY, LOVE/NO ONE IS ILLEGAL/open border, anti-racist good thinking dupes, they are the silent majority when it comes to white genetic continuity, particularly when it comes to revealed preferences of the race of men they wish to date, what they want their kids to look like, etc. The sad thing is that while white men will even get into street brawls defending the honor of their favorite sports ball teams, they are absolutely nowhere to be found when a Twitter/MSM pile-on begins after some Becky has the temerity to openly say she is disappointed her donor kid did not come out blue eyed and blonde like her beloved grand dad, but looking like a surlier version of Dante DeaBlasio instead.
They gave me a whole battery of blood tests for genetic diseases and had me do a physical. So it’s not like they just let people fill out forms and then become a sperm donor without conducting due diligence. although they definitely didn’t go super deep into family history either.
Weihan Zhang says:
Pregnant womans who have sex with no one
Not want child be of species below one.
Child turn out wrong species;
She fill pants with feces!
Doctor giving wrong spermatozoon!
Yeah, when the Law Schools and Bar Assocs figure out that the theory of “loss of genetic affinity” suddenly gives every cuckolded father a right to sue and a schedule of damages, they will equally suddenly decide that loss of genetic affinity is not an actionable claim after all, and is probably racist too.
Stick to suing Christian bakers, girls.
Ok, you’re a bad person, but you’re right, it is kinda funny.
This is the kind of thing that happens when you put vibrant people into the chain of custody. Lately Amazon has had a problem with its vibrant "independent contractor" delivery drivers - they will deliver a package, take a picture of it on the customer's door step, then go right back and steal it. Somehow it doesn't occur to them that lots of people now have security cameras.
OTOH, I'm also amazed at how many porch pirates nowadays are white trash types - I assume mostly opiate addicts.
The porch pirates are all white in the commercials.
I think people are thrown off by looking at the baby as the "product" that you bought. You are really contracting (and paying quite a bit), for a service which will allow you to have some input and control and knowledge of your child's provenance. It's the failure to deliver on that promise that is the core harm. Quantifying the damage is hard, but that's true in lots of areas of the law. That's what judges and juries are for.
Some people might be really motivated by this and it could be worth quite a lot to them. Others would be happy to sign up for the cut-rate "mystery sperm special." Ideally, it would be addressed in the contract from the get-go.
I think that’s a basic problem right there. Actual lawyers can update this, but as I recall, the standard remedy in breach of contract cases is to restore the parties to the status quo ante, which is obviously not possible with “wrongful birth”: you can’t shove the kid back into the egg. So instead they do nothing. Maybe they could refund your IVF fees. That would be something at least.
Mostly I think it’s just legal/epistemological/metaphysical Gordian Knot crossed with a Tar Baby, so courts don’t want to touch it and they just hope the plaintiffs will go away and let them get beck to easier cases. Either that or the legislature will pass some law they can just apply without too much effort.
The difference between bull semen and human is that the bull’s would never be sold, or bought, without a name attached.
I feel bad for friends who adopted kids and are now having trouble with them. These days pretty much only white trash moms are adopting out kids and well-meaning adoptive parents don't know the trouble they're getting into.
There was a thing about adopting Russian kids a few years ago. A few couples whom I knew did that and it was invariably a disaster. Between the childrens’ sketchy hereditary genetics and the filth and foolishness of modern culture to which the kids were exposed (that fu***** internet) these parents suffered the trials of Job.
In other cases, it is just mismatch. My wife is working with a Top 1% type Main Line family who adopted a little girl from a Romanian orphanage 20 years ago. Naturally their expectation is that this girl should be attending college and getting a degree, etc. - it's unthinkable to them that she wouldn't do that - what would all their friends at the country club think if they didn't send their kid to college? But the bottom line is that she is not really college material. If she had stayed back home in Romania and been a peasant farm girl she would have been fine - there's nothing really wrong with her. She would be harvesting cabbage like crazy. Maybe her mother's nutrition wasn't 100% perfect and maybe she smoked during pregnancy, but objectively mom was probably 17 years old and more fit for childbearing than the average 37 year old Main Line momma pumped full of hormones on her 3rd in-vitro attempt. The kid just doesn't have the capability to work at the level needed to do college work, even in a "soft" major at a 2nd tier college. The same thing would have happened if I had been adopted by a band of gypsy musicians. I have no natural musical talent - they could have had me fiddling day and night from childhood onward and I'd still not be able to carry a tune because I would be mismatched with my adoptive family.
Well, I guess a ‘sperm bank’ is the only kind of bank a gent can make a deposit and take a withdrawal simultaneously, provided, of course, the facilities are well appointed.
It’s all a Cock and Bull story.
I’m not talking about commercials, I’m talking about actual security cam footage.
She shouldn’t be terrified, she should be telling her even before she is old enough to really understand. The kid is going to find out eventually anyway, one way or another and when she does she is going to hate her mother if she feels this was concealed from her.
Right that’s the current position of the court. I don’t think it should change either.
Phrasing!
Yeah, Richard Hell could have set them straight on that count: “Love Comes In Spurts.”
Lawyer “thought”.
Well Jack, i’ll admit you’re an upgrade from the judge whose metric for humans was “healthy” vs. “unhealthy”.
The JackD metric is:
— healthy vs. unhealthy
— white vs. black
— intelligent vs. stupid.
Here’s the anwser to your question: “Because the woman signed up to be impregnated with the sperm of a *particular* donor.” Or a donor with some particular set of characteristics. It actually is not JackD’s choice to decide what particular characteristics of the sperm are important and of “equal value”. And pregnancy–having a child–isn’t a stereo it’s the most thing in life.
Personally, i’ve felt my whole life that a lot of women make poor choices about who to get impregnated by … they don’t choose me! Heck, if all these black women out there would stop getting knocked up by DeShitavious and get impregnated with my sperm instead, America’s race problem would be at an end. The next generations of blacks would be much whiter, much better looking and have an average IQ above the white mean. (Ok–i’m half Irish–so maybe the criminality thing would still be outlier.) But bizarrely, black women keep letting themselves get knocked up by DeShawn or Jalen or Jamal … with the expected outcome.
If i insisted that any woman make “the superior choice” to use AnotherDad sperm … they’d toss my ass in jail–even though their child would be better off.
Now obviously the choice of a father for your child is more important than a sandwich, but the point is the same - sometimes there are distinctions without a difference that the law is willing to recognize, even if these things are super SPECIAL to you. For example, if I accidentally run over your precious little dog Fluffy, who means the world to you, the law will award you the value of one generic cocker spaniel, even though you would not part with her for any amount of money.
Well Jack, i'll admit you're an upgrade from the judge whose metric for humans was "healthy" vs. "unhealthy".
The JackD metric is:
-- healthy vs. unhealthy
-- white vs. black
-- intelligent vs. stupid.
Here's the anwser to your question: "Because the woman signed up to be impregnated with the sperm of a *particular* donor." Or a donor with some particular set of characteristics. It actually is not JackD's choice to decide what particular characteristics of the sperm are important and of "equal value". And pregnancy--having a child--isn't a stereo it's the most thing in life.
Personally, i've felt my whole life that a lot of women make poor choices about who to get impregnated by ... they don't choose me! Heck, if all these black women out there would stop getting knocked up by DeShitavious and get impregnated with my sperm instead, America's race problem would be at an end. The next generations of blacks would be much whiter, much better looking and have an average IQ above the white mean. (Ok--i'm half Irish--so maybe the criminality thing would still be outlier.) But bizarrely, black women keep letting themselves get knocked up by DeShawn or Jalen or Jamal ... with the expected outcome.
If i insisted that any woman make "the superior choice" to use AnotherDad sperm ... they'd toss my ass in jail--even though their child would be better off.
The point is that the law recognizes some wrongs and not others. Even if you REALLY REALLY wanted whole wheat on your sandwich and you get white, they don’t put the waitress in jail even if you made that SUPER CLEAR to her when you ordered that your tuna fish should be served on WHOLE WHEAT only.
Now obviously the choice of a father for your child is more important than a sandwich, but the point is the same – sometimes there are distinctions without a difference that the law is willing to recognize, even if these things are super SPECIAL to you. For example, if I accidentally run over your precious little dog Fluffy, who means the world to you, the law will award you the value of one generic cocker spaniel, even though you would not part with her for any amount of money.
Your sandwich and cocker spaniel damages examples don’t apply to either sperm switcheroo situation.
First, the accidental surprise black baby—if the lesbians had rejected the baby and gave it up for adoption, the costs—monetary, societal, and especially for the kid in the future—emotional, could be far greater than the consequences of not receiving a whole wheat sandwich. If wrong baby happens again, under possible future laws, massive rewards for emotional damages are possible—whether or not the client decides to keep the kid. Smart labs (if they don’t already) will have clients sign airtight “life is like a box of chocolates” waivers before doing business.
Second, AnotherDad’s comment pertained to the incubus fertility doctor—your analogy of accidentally running over a beloved pet is a complete non sequitur. I take it you aren’t involved in making legal arguments at work—your ability to make a case is rather lacking.
Since these cases involve sperm banks, how about “confounded interest” for a term?
https://www.10news.com/news/national/florida-woman-tracks-down-52-donor-siblings-hopes-us-sets-regulations-on-births-per-sperm-donor
What the hell is wrong with these people. The most important thing in life--heck the very purpose and defintion of biological life--which normal people have understood for thousands, hundreds of thousands of years ... seems to be beyond our lawyer elite.
You are comparing two babies to an Escalade and a Suburu?
You aware of the demographics of those two makes?
Racist!
Also, I sort of felt compelled to mention my significantly larger than normal genitals in the screening process, but decided that would make me sound creepy and didn't...so that's a bonus someone will potentially end up with.
Genetic confounding!
Some of the Russian kids are particular nightmares because they have fetal alcohol syndrome. Taking a kid like this is like inviting the furies of Hell into your home.
In other cases, it is just mismatch. My wife is working with a Top 1% type Main Line family who adopted a little girl from a Romanian orphanage 20 years ago. Naturally their expectation is that this girl should be attending college and getting a degree, etc. – it’s unthinkable to them that she wouldn’t do that – what would all their friends at the country club think if they didn’t send their kid to college? But the bottom line is that she is not really college material. If she had stayed back home in Romania and been a peasant farm girl she would have been fine – there’s nothing really wrong with her. She would be harvesting cabbage like crazy. Maybe her mother’s nutrition wasn’t 100% perfect and maybe she smoked during pregnancy, but objectively mom was probably 17 years old and more fit for childbearing than the average 37 year old Main Line momma pumped full of hormones on her 3rd in-vitro attempt. The kid just doesn’t have the capability to work at the level needed to do college work, even in a “soft” major at a 2nd tier college. The same thing would have happened if I had been adopted by a band of gypsy musicians. I have no natural musical talent – they could have had me fiddling day and night from childhood onward and I’d still not be able to carry a tune because I would be mismatched with my adoptive family.
JackD!!!!!!!!
I love you and you’re really smart.
But you comment waaaaaay too much! Give it a rest. Please.
Boy you got that right.
This is truly vile and a crime that is much, much worse than rape. It’s akin to rape with pregnancy–stolen reproduction. But even that doesn’t cover it, because in rape, the child is still the woman’s. Basically this guy’s reproductive capability–which is essentially providing support in return for a woman bearing and raising his child–is stolen. If an only child–completely stolen, his lineage destroyed, genocided.
Yet … crickets.
The modern line on all the old sanctions for female adultery are “ancient barbaric patriarchy. Yet there is a clear reason for the seriousness, and it was not “unfair”. It was in balance with the sanctions with rape. The basic idea in both cases–cheating on reproduction, stealing reproduction from people is serious business, akin to murder.
This, probably more than anything else, tells you what a truly vile, irredeemably evil society ours is.
As a society we'd be much better off putting our "best and brightest" to work in the sciences and business. But as long as there is big bucks in using the legal system to allocate resources people who are good at it will be in high demand.
“Business” is mostly swindelry, like law but with lower IQ.
There have been several scandals in The Netherlands in recent years where the person running the clinic used their own sperm instead of the donors.
This is truly vile and a crime that is much, much worse than rape. It's akin to rape with pregnancy--stolen reproduction. But even that doesn't cover it, because in rape, the child is still the woman's. Basically this guy's reproductive capability--which is essentially providing support in return for a woman bearing and raising his child--is stolen. If an only child--completely stolen, his lineage destroyed, genocided.
Yet ... crickets.
The modern line on all the old sanctions for female adultery are "ancient barbaric patriarchy. Yet there is a clear reason for the seriousness, and it was not "unfair". It was in balance with the sanctions with rape. The basic idea in both cases--cheating on reproduction, stealing reproduction from people is serious business, akin to murder.
Of course you’re right, but male-female rape isn’t considered the highest of crimes in America because of the reproductive opportunity costs to the woman (which, after all can be easily nullified by legal abortion), but because it’s an affront to one of Our Most Sacred Values: female power, or the hegemony of female sexuality, if you will. The driving moral complex of the day is that the latter should advantage women as much as possible, and that they are to be free to wield it as wantonly as they please — that pancakes pretty quickly when it’s simply taken by force (or, these days, by persuasion, opportunism, etc). It’s the profaning of a sacred cow.
For many years Brasil used to be prime time location,location,location for that kind of reunions.
A proper Teutoneugenics could easily beat the cost and emotional pain of Daily Neymaring.
Now obviously the choice of a father for your child is more important than a sandwich, but the point is the same - sometimes there are distinctions without a difference that the law is willing to recognize, even if these things are super SPECIAL to you. For example, if I accidentally run over your precious little dog Fluffy, who means the world to you, the law will award you the value of one generic cocker spaniel, even though you would not part with her for any amount of money.
But the point–mine and several other people’s–which you keep ignoring/downplaying, is reproducing with the particular individual you’ve chosen is super-important, generally regarded as the most important decision one makes in life.
Your “SPECIAL to you” is nonsense. This isn’t about a sandwich, or Fluffy. It is special to everyone. (Or at least most people.) Every culture–certainly every civilized culture–has taken this issue of controlling your reproduction *very* seriously, with laws and social sanctions around marriage, divorce, rape, adultery, paternity. (As i recall your own people, have bothered to write down some specific rules about who is in, who is out.)
Essentially the genius lawyers/judges seem to recognize: healthy vs. not healthy. You, JackD, seem willing to expand that to three things “SPECIAL to you”: health, race, and intelligence. But then you dismiss everything else a woman may want/value as fluff–or Fluffy.
Here’s the point–it ain’t *your* call! This is reproduction–the most serious thing we do; historically, culturally understood as such. These women sign up to get precisely what the sperm bank is promising they are getting. If they do not get that it is fraud in the most precious/important area of life.
Local family got in trouble during the 90s. They sold 30some heifers as out of a certain bull. Well, they weren’t.
In the long run, pretty much everyone is going to get their DNA tested, especially kids whose birth parents are not their biological parents, because they are curious about their heritage and genetic diseases and often can't get this information any other way. The era of anonymous sperm donation is coming to an end. A lot of kids already know who their donor is or will know when they become 18. Donors are more willing to accept that their offspring are going to want to have contact with them, not in the sense of being financially responsible for their college tuition but in a sort of " friendly uncle", send Christmas cards role. This seems to work just fine and all the secrecy that surrounded the procedure in the past was completely unnecessary. The only real unfairness is that donors in the past were promised anonymity but technology and changes in society have changed the terms of the deal on them.
I read one article long ago that getting the donor involved is a bad idea. What can end up happening is that the relationship becomes less uncle-nephew and more father-son, leaving the non-biological father, the one who paid for it all so he could have the fatherhood experience, being shoved into the uncle role.
So maybe much later after the kid is no longer a kid.
People may pick sperms donors based on qualities like height, intelligence, etc., but they are also often looking for a child who might look and act somewhat like the one they’d have if they conceived naturally, and that means a child from your ethnic group. This might not matter quite as much if it’s a single woman choosing the sperm donor. But if there is a father (or second mother) in the picture, the non-biological parent may have strong emotional reasons for wanting the sperm donor to share his or her ethnic group, or at least race. The alternative is to every so often feel painfully reminded, when you look at “your” child, that for whatever reason you were unable to contribute to their genetic makeup.
So *of course* the victims should be able to sue these quacks.
The reason you can sue if you get the wrong bull sperm but not the wrong human sperm is that humans are not purebreds. Even if you pick out the sperm from the Aryan looking guy, there’s no guaranty that your kid is going to come out looking like Horst Wessel and not like his Uncle Moshe. If you get a white baby then you’re close enough.
I'm glad we can finally stop hearing about the freaking holocaust. Sure 5 or 6 million dead, but it was in a war with 50-60 million dead. Small beer. A sideshow that didn't even affect the outcome.
And those millions of Jews were quickly replaced on the planet with millions more smart Chinese. Paternity doesn't matter, humans aren't pure breds ... so close enough.
In law school in the 80s we had a case where a vasectomy didn’t take. No damages. A child is a blessing.
My wife’s maid of honor ended up in a lesbian marriage to a duke (and dyke) professor in the 90s. They had artificially inseminated twins. They separated. They had a custody suit that led to birth mom (my wife’s friend) getting pretty much everything.
My wife and I divorced. She died of opioid overdose.
Another friend was the lead lawyer in the gay marriage supreme court suit. Roberta “Robbie” Kaplan. who used to buy weed from me (just cos I knew a guy who knew a guy). I knew some weird folk. All Harvard Law. Nice people, though. Most people don’t have any particular motivation ascribed other than going along to get along.
So maybe much later after the kid is no longer a kid.
In a lot of places now there’s mandatory disclosure at age 18 but not before. Maybe you don’t want to introduce the sperm donor in to the kid’s life when the kid is little but the kid should know all along that he’s a donor baby so that he doesn’t end up being shocked later on. Kids will accept pretty much anything you tell them when they are little. The old “keep it a secret” thing always backfired in the end.
Flip. find and read a copy of “The Boys from Brazil.” A real page turner.
There’s always the good old turkey baster.
But in the Stupid State of Kansas, you may want to think twice before helping out:
Kansas is really, really stupid.
https://www.surrogacy-lawyer.com/uncategorized/brooklyn-professor-walks-a-fine-line-between-father-and-donor/
https://abovethelaw.com/2016/06/i-want-to-put-a-baby-in-you-1-sperm-donor/
In other cases, it is just mismatch. My wife is working with a Top 1% type Main Line family who adopted a little girl from a Romanian orphanage 20 years ago. Naturally their expectation is that this girl should be attending college and getting a degree, etc. - it's unthinkable to them that she wouldn't do that - what would all their friends at the country club think if they didn't send their kid to college? But the bottom line is that she is not really college material. If she had stayed back home in Romania and been a peasant farm girl she would have been fine - there's nothing really wrong with her. She would be harvesting cabbage like crazy. Maybe her mother's nutrition wasn't 100% perfect and maybe she smoked during pregnancy, but objectively mom was probably 17 years old and more fit for childbearing than the average 37 year old Main Line momma pumped full of hormones on her 3rd in-vitro attempt. The kid just doesn't have the capability to work at the level needed to do college work, even in a "soft" major at a 2nd tier college. The same thing would have happened if I had been adopted by a band of gypsy musicians. I have no natural musical talent - they could have had me fiddling day and night from childhood onward and I'd still not be able to carry a tune because I would be mismatched with my adoptive family.
any data on how adoptions from other countries work out ?
Well Jack, i'll admit you're an upgrade from the judge whose metric for humans was "healthy" vs. "unhealthy".
The JackD metric is:
-- healthy vs. unhealthy
-- white vs. black
-- intelligent vs. stupid.
Here's the anwser to your question: "Because the woman signed up to be impregnated with the sperm of a *particular* donor." Or a donor with some particular set of characteristics. It actually is not JackD's choice to decide what particular characteristics of the sperm are important and of "equal value". And pregnancy--having a child--isn't a stereo it's the most thing in life.
Personally, i've felt my whole life that a lot of women make poor choices about who to get impregnated by ... they don't choose me! Heck, if all these black women out there would stop getting knocked up by DeShitavious and get impregnated with my sperm instead, America's race problem would be at an end. The next generations of blacks would be much whiter, much better looking and have an average IQ above the white mean. (Ok--i'm half Irish--so maybe the criminality thing would still be outlier.) But bizarrely, black women keep letting themselves get knocked up by DeShawn or Jalen or Jamal ... with the expected outcome.
If i insisted that any woman make "the superior choice" to use AnotherDad sperm ... they'd toss my ass in jail--even though their child would be better off.
Black women with >90 IQ would be better off to find a talented tenth black father or if very dark skinned a working class white male to do the job. Those with <90 IQ would be better off for their own cases as well as their progeny to stay childfree. They get knocked up by DeShitavius because of poor decision making ability and the likelihood he's horny and persistent.
Our welfare system promotes illegitimate child bearing instead of deterring it. Women too stupid to graduate high school should be given a stipend to get Essure or another permanent birth control. DeShitavius should get vasectomized as a one time get out of jail early when he gets busted for anything less than rape, murder or armed robbery.
JackD classic.
I’m glad we can finally stop hearing about the freaking holocaust. Sure 5 or 6 million dead, but it was in a war with 50-60 million dead. Small beer. A sideshow that didn’t even affect the outcome.
And those millions of Jews were quickly replaced on the planet with millions more smart Chinese. Paternity doesn’t matter, humans aren’t pure breds … so close enough.
I'm glad we can finally stop hearing about the freaking holocaust. Sure 5 or 6 million dead, but it was in a war with 50-60 million dead. Small beer. A sideshow that didn't even affect the outcome.
And those millions of Jews were quickly replaced on the planet with millions more smart Chinese. Paternity doesn't matter, humans aren't pure breds ... so close enough.
Oh, that’s good that you acknowledge it. At least you aren’t a Holocaust denier.
BTW, when the ultra-Orthodox use artificial insemination, they seek out non-Jewish donors – it leads to fewer Halachic issues.
Liberals don’t believe in the blank slate when it comes to sperm selection
Now obviously the choice of a father for your child is more important than a sandwich, but the point is the same - sometimes there are distinctions without a difference that the law is willing to recognize, even if these things are super SPECIAL to you. For example, if I accidentally run over your precious little dog Fluffy, who means the world to you, the law will award you the value of one generic cocker spaniel, even though you would not part with her for any amount of money.
The point of Steve’s post is that the law sometimes lags until society recognizes and reacts to certain undesirable actions by introducing heavy sanctions against the negligent/criminal.
Your sandwich and cocker spaniel damages examples don’t apply to either sperm switcheroo situation.
First, the accidental surprise black baby—if the lesbians had rejected the baby and gave it up for adoption, the costs—monetary, societal, and especially for the kid in the future—emotional, could be far greater than the consequences of not receiving a whole wheat sandwich. If wrong baby happens again, under possible future laws, massive rewards for emotional damages are possible—whether or not the client decides to keep the kid. Smart labs (if they don’t already) will have clients sign airtight “life is like a box of chocolates” waivers before doing business.
Second, AnotherDad’s comment pertained to the incubus fertility doctor—your analogy of accidentally running over a beloved pet is a complete non sequitur. I take it you aren’t involved in making legal arguments at work—your ability to make a case is rather lacking.
What would the Halachic issues be? I’m not trying to troll, I’m unschooled in Judaism and genuinely curious
Now obviously the choice of a father for your child is more important than a sandwich, but the point is the same - sometimes there are distinctions without a difference that the law is willing to recognize, even if these things are super SPECIAL to you. For example, if I accidentally run over your precious little dog Fluffy, who means the world to you, the law will award you the value of one generic cocker spaniel, even though you would not part with her for any amount of money.
Could you comment on the case in Israel where a Gentile was convicted of raping a Jewish woman because he had led her to believe he was Jewish?
I love you and you're really smart.
But you comment waaaaaay too much! Give it a rest. Please.
He doesn’t comment too much. I may not agree with everything he writes, but it is not a nuisance.
I'm glad we can finally stop hearing about the freaking holocaust. Sure 5 or 6 million dead, but it was in a war with 50-60 million dead. Small beer. A sideshow that didn't even affect the outcome.
And those millions of Jews were quickly replaced on the planet with millions more smart Chinese. Paternity doesn't matter, humans aren't pure breds ... so close enough.
It’s interesting that Jack D sees Horst Wessel as some kind of prototypical goy. Some people see the world through brown-tinted glasses.
https://www.tennisworldusa.org/imgb/61273/boris-becker-trains-eye-on-leo-borg-as-one-of-sweden-s-brighter-prospects.jpg
https://www.biography.com/.image/ar_1:1%2Cc_fill%2Ccs_srgb%2Cg_face%2Cq_auto:good%2Cw_300/MTIwNjA4NjMzODI4ODM2ODc2/steffi-graf-9317586-1-402.jpg
Please explain.
I love you and you're really smart.
But you comment waaaaaay too much! Give it a rest. Please.
Just trying to keep up with yours truly. Headed into surgery in the morning so you should get a few days of relief coming up.
Should women have the ability to sue for damages if the sperm banks lied about donors IQ, educational credentials, family background, mental health etc…
James Aggeles, who donated his sperm to Georgia-based Xytex Corp. and fathered 36 children between 2000 and 2014. He billed himself as a highly intelligent donor working toward a PhD in neuroscience engineering, but he was actually a college dropout diagnosed with schizophrenia and narcissistic personality disorder who has spent time behind bars for burglary,
According to the sperm bank, he was the “perfect donor” , academically accomplished and musically gifted. The donor’s profile states he has an IQ of 160, bachelor’s and master’s degrees in neuroscience and is pursuing a PhD. He has received international acclaim for his talent as a musician…Included in the profile is a six-page health questionnaire that asks whether he or any blood relative has any of 143 medical conditions. He answers no to all. Specifically asked if he has schizophrenia or manic depression (bipolar disorder), he responds “no.”
can these families litigate against the fraud perpetrated against them ? No
https://www.courthousenews.com/no-such-thing-as-wrongful-birth-in-georgia/
Thus Sperm banks can give women sperm from homeless crazy people and the recipients have no legal standing , even when they lie and claim to give you sperm from a college professor with no history of mental illness.
Dr. Norman Barwin was found out when his Ashkenazi Jewish DNA turned up in the children he fathered through his deceived patients.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/lawsuit-against-fertility-doctor-accused-of-using-own-sperm-expands-to-150-people-adversely-affected/amp
I'm glad we can finally stop hearing about the freaking holocaust. Sure 5 or 6 million dead, but it was in a war with 50-60 million dead. Small beer. A sideshow that didn't even affect the outcome.
And those millions of Jews were quickly replaced on the planet with millions more smart Chinese. Paternity doesn't matter, humans aren't pure breds ... so close enough.
Anon, stillCARealist was being as polite as possible.
Well, one is or is not a Jew, and it depends on the mother, not the father. And selecting primo Aryan sires improves the bloodline, which is why Israel imported and adopted out many German infants at the time of its creation, according to Revilo Oliver and several others.
For the case in Indiana, these were for the most part couples who were undergoing IVF treatment. So the husband’s sperm was thrown away and instead the doctor inseminated the women with his own sperm. He basically cuckcolded the future “fathers”. I see a prison sentence being wholly justified in this case.
On what legal theory? And what would the damages be?
‘On what legal theory?
Breach of contract. If I pay a painter to paint my house green and teal, and he paints it rust and red, that’s breach of contract.
But in the Stupid State of Kansas, you may want to think twice before helping out:Kansas is really, really stupid.
Search on Ari Nagel:
https://www.surrogacy-lawyer.com/uncategorized/brooklyn-professor-walks-a-fine-line-between-father-and-donor/
https://abovethelaw.com/2016/06/i-want-to-put-a-baby-in-you-1-sperm-donor/
How did the kids turn out from the fraudulent acts? Did nature or nurture rule? Before sperm donation and genetic testing you might not have been able to do this experiment, so this is new data.
I know, right? JackD could at least spice up his routine and not rely on the most hackneyed cliches. He should cite, maybe Der Boris Becker oder Shteffi Graf once in a while…
Isn’t the problem really that while good donors may just come and go, bad donors leave an indelible stain?
Yes, Mr. Joe, I remember that ’70’s movie..it raised quite a little furor (some puns are better when spoken than in print)
Your sandwich and cocker spaniel damages examples don’t apply to either sperm switcheroo situation.
First, the accidental surprise black baby—if the lesbians had rejected the baby and gave it up for adoption, the costs—monetary, societal, and especially for the kid in the future—emotional, could be far greater than the consequences of not receiving a whole wheat sandwich. If wrong baby happens again, under possible future laws, massive rewards for emotional damages are possible—whether or not the client decides to keep the kid. Smart labs (if they don’t already) will have clients sign airtight “life is like a box of chocolates” waivers before doing business.
Second, AnotherDad’s comment pertained to the incubus fertility doctor—your analogy of accidentally running over a beloved pet is a complete non sequitur. I take it you aren’t involved in making legal arguments at work—your ability to make a case is rather lacking.
What we are really arguing about is whether the goods delivered are conforming or non-conforming – in part this depends on how specific the contract was and what market expectations are. If the doctor made specific promises (“donor is a Nobel Prize winner”) and they are false, then you have a cause of action. If you signed up for a white guy, you should get a white guy. But beyond that it gets dicey – if all you have is a picture of some handsome guy, that’s pretty vague.
This story serves to highlight a more fundamental problem. Social scientists are increasingly of the opinion that random sperm donation is the only way forward to a truly just and equitable society. White women are still shockingly discriminatory when it comes to choosing the man who will be the father of her children – studies show a horrifying percentage who still make their choices based on race, family, appearance, character and intelligence.
This can only perpetuate white privilege. Discrimination in pair-bonding is immoral, and perhaps should be made illegal.
A small, but growing, school of thought believes that we must go further by introducing affirmative action in sperm donation. This could be considered reparations for centuries of oppressive world-wide sexual apartheid. A global problem calls for a global solution.
Breach of contract. If I pay a painter to paint my house green and teal, and he paints it rust and red, that's breach of contract.
Breach of contract. If I pay a painter to paint my house green and teal, and he paints it rust and red, that’s breach of contract.
What would the damages be?
That's interesting. It would go further, but I would say for starters that as he essentially fathered a child upon you that wasn't the child you asked for, that he becomes at least as responsible for the costs of rearing him as the mother would be.
Presumably, the cost of raising a child in middle-class comfort and style, sending him to college, and all that comes to around a million dollars, all in. Maybe somewhat less -- but then, unwanted daddy isn't really in a position to bargain. He could always agree to take the child instead.
If you signed up for a white guy, you should get a white guy.
If you don’t, what should damages be?
‘What would the damages be?’
That’s interesting. It would go further, but I would say for starters that as he essentially fathered a child upon you that wasn’t the child you asked for, that he becomes at least as responsible for the costs of rearing him as the mother would be.
Presumably, the cost of raising a child in middle-class comfort and style, sending him to college, and all that comes to around a million dollars, all in. Maybe somewhat less — but then, unwanted daddy isn’t really in a position to bargain. He could always agree to take the child instead.
It is beginning to sound like rape.
https://www.tennisworldusa.org/imgb/61273/boris-becker-trains-eye-on-leo-borg-as-one-of-sweden-s-brighter-prospects.jpg
https://www.biography.com/.image/ar_1:1%2Cc_fill%2Ccs_srgb%2Cg_face%2Cq_auto:good%2Cw_300/MTIwNjA4NjMzODI4ODM2ODc2/steffi-graf-9317586-1-402.jpg
With a shnozz like that I would check into her family’s Aryan Certificate.
That's interesting. It would go further, but I would say for starters that as he essentially fathered a child upon you that wasn't the child you asked for, that he becomes at least as responsible for the costs of rearing him as the mother would be.
Presumably, the cost of raising a child in middle-class comfort and style, sending him to college, and all that comes to around a million dollars, all in. Maybe somewhat less -- but then, unwanted daddy isn't really in a position to bargain. He could always agree to take the child instead.
That’s interesting. It would go further, but I would say for starters that as he essentially fathered a child upon you that wasn’t the child you asked for
It is beginning to sound like rape.
The only regulation that could possibly benefit the horrific artificial insemination business would be its complete abolition. The very existence of such a thing is an abomination.
Was going to hit ‘agree’, but haven’t commented enough recently for me to be able to.
Artificial insemination and IVF are disgusting. They’re of a piece with our obsessive materialist culture: treating babies as if they were consumer items, as accessories to be had whenever the the fancy strikes you.
Any healthy society would regard such practices as inhuman depravities, far worse than say, prostitution.
Does it really take nearly $800,000 to raise a single child in Singapore? No wonder the TFR is so low.