Woman's suit seeking info on sperm donor can proceed

This is going to open a big, ugly can of worms...

If the donor requested anonymity then there are going to be some more lawsuits if she gets the info.

Yep. You'd have to be nuts to donate sperm, wind up getting hit with a support order ten years later. This woman should get over herself, be happy she's living a good life - better than plenty of people who know oh too well who daddy is and wish they'd never met him.

I think, more importantly, women who opt to go this route should consider the long term effects it's going to have on the child. I think the woman's mother is a bit of a hypocrite in this case. I'm guessing (because of the era) there would have been an anonymity agreement signed, yet she's now helping her daughter sue for the right to overturn that right of the donor.

Kind of dodging her responsibility here.

As well, I always wonder about the donors motives. There are dozens of potential reasons that could be argued, but at the end of the day.... I don't like this business. Too sketchy.

The whole baby making industry gives me the creeps - surrogates, IVF producing octomoms, etc. If you can't have kids and want some, adopt - plenty of those who need it.

Just had a case of a surrogate refusing to have an abortion the biological parents wanted because the baby was defective. Another can of worms - who's responsible for that baby's care? If the surrogate doesn't want him/her, do you really want to leave it with parents that wanted it aborted?

wants to know who the father is for future health issues my ass, i smell a gold digger here. There should be a restriction on the information, that only the health information get released, no personal information, and the mother is prohibited from getting any money from the doner.

The whole baby making industry gives me the creeps - surrogates, IVF producing octomoms, etc. If you can't have kids and want some, adopt - plenty of those who need it.

Just had a case of a surrogate refusing to have an abortion the biological parents wanted because the baby was defective. Another can of worms - who's responsible for that baby's care? If the surrogate doesn't want him/her, do you really want to leave it with parents that wanted it aborted?
I agree. It's just another case of messing with Mother Nature. As you pointed out, there are far too many children out there that need homes and could be adopted. Why not look after those little ones first?

As for these parents that want to abort any child that isn't "perfect", I have no use for them. You know when you make the decision to have a child that there are absolutely no guarantees that the little one won't have some sort of problem. If you aren't willing to accept that risk, and that child (with whatever problems it may have), you shouldn't be having children. After all - there are thousands of "defects" that a child could be born with that can't be detected before birth (deafness, blindness, learning disabilities, etc...). What's the difference between those and the conditions that can?

That's really a good idea. If she's claiming to want the information for health reasons, that's all she should be granted.

Good one!

Agreed, no donor information, only any health facts needed. I too smell a gold digger -

Digging for what tho? There is no right to sue for child support or something anymore.

I agree too, no personal info other than what could affect the child. No names, relations, birth dates, whatsoever. Nothing that could lead to a specific person. Just medically important stuff. And there probably won't be much of that, because I assume that only healthy men, without a weird medical history and bad genes can donate.

I believe you're correct there - that only "healthy" individuals can donate. Unfortunately, some diseases can have a later onset, and in this day and age, we're seeing more and more health problems in people who you wouldn't suspect of developing them (heart disease, diabetes, cancer, etc.).

Even so - regardless where the sperm comes from (no pun intended there), that's always going to be a chance you're going to take.

IF she does find out the donars name ect... could he sue? Breach of contract, invasion of privacy stuff like the?

I am sure. The discussion is pretty new, and I am sure that when he donated 29 years ago, he was assured he would never be found or even know whether his sperm was used.

I think it would go both ways. If the children have the right to find out where (who) they come from, then the men have the right to find out if they fathered a child by donation...
And seriously, would women want that? Would we want the donor to help raising our children conceived by donation? Methinks not!! Isn't that the whole reason of using anonymous donors?

I am sure. The discussion is pretty new, and I am sure that when he donated 29 years ago, he was assured he would never be found or even know whether his sperm was used.
I would be sure of that also, however, it's been overturned in adoption cases, so I'm sure that will play a part in setting the precedent here as well.


One would think... I can't recall off the top of my head if birth parents have ever won that right with the children they've adopted out. Maybe someone else here has.

I'm still trying to figure out why anyone would go that route in the first place. The whole thing is just seems so wrong.