Sperm, children, and our rights

[Avatar4321]

FDA Issues Man Giving Away Sperm for Free on Website Cease and Desist Order | TheBlaze.com

This is an interesting story. A man has offered to donate sperm for free to a number of people having difficulty concieving. The FDA issued an order for him to stop.

Does an individual have the right to share his sperm with others for free when he believes he is providing a community service or does the government have a right to regulate and stop him from doing so?

Second, question: How is this significantly differet from sleeping around with a number of women and getting them pregnant through normal means? (Aside from the personal responsibility the father has and the general sleeziness of it) It seems to me that alot of the argument justifying government interference in this story could be likewise made for one night stands and traditional conceptions.

Im curious to see how this discussion goes.

 

[syrenn]

Good question. I can see this from several angles though.

I get where they want him to stop for health and safety reasons....ie: the donor is not tested for safety. However it is not much different then having unprotected sex with an untested partner.

There could be legal responsibility issues for the children as he is a known donor/father. With sperm banks the downer is an unknown.

He is not charging for his sperm....which is what i see as the problem. He is cutting into the sperm banks revenue.

The way i see it is if all parties are consenting.... no one should interfere. I would however think that legal documents need to be signed by all parties where the donor gives up all rights to the offspring and the woman gives up all rights to the man for child support.

 

[Dragon]

FDA Issues Man Giving Away Sperm for Free on Website Cease and Desist Order | TheBlaze.com

This is an interesting story. A man has offered to donate sperm for free to a number of people having difficulty concieving. The FDA issued an order for him to stop.

Does an individual have the right to share his sperm with others for free when he believes he is providing a community service or does the government have a right to regulate and stop him from doing so?

Apparently the problem the FDA has with what he is doing is not that he's giving away sperm for free but this:

"The FDA sent Arsenault the letter late last year telling him he must stop because he does not follow the agency’s requirements for getting tested for sexually transmitted diseases within seven days before giving sperm."

It's a public-health concern. The article goes on to say that if he complied with that rule, he would no longer be able to give it away free. Perhaps asking to be reimbursed the cost of the testing would solve the problem.

Second, question: How is this significantly differet from sleeping around with a number of women and getting them pregnant through normal means?

There are obvious differences, but none from a public-health standpoint which is all the FDA is concerned with here. (OTOH, if he were doing it that way, perhaps the FDA would not have any jurisdiction.) The differences -- well, imagine yourself an infertile man who wants children, as does your wife. Can you not see a difference between her using artificial insemination to get pregnant, and fucking some other dude?

Plus, either of the two parties in question might not want to. Sexual attraction is a very personal thing and hard to predict.

 

[Photonic]

FDA Issues Man Giving Away Sperm for Free on Website Cease and Desist Order | TheBlaze.com

This is an interesting story. A man has offered to donate sperm for free to a number of people having difficulty concieving. The FDA issued an order for him to stop.

Does an individual have the right to share his sperm with others for free when he believes he is providing a community service or does the government have a right to regulate and stop him from doing so?

Second, question: How is this significantly differet from sleeping around with a number of women and getting them pregnant through normal means? (Aside from the personal responsibility the father has and the general sleeziness of it) It seems to me that alot of the argument justifying government interference in this story could be likewise made for one night stands and traditional conceptions.

Im curious to see how this discussion goes.

Yea, but if that sperm gets inside a woman, she loses all rights to her own body.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

There could be legal responsibility issues for the children as he is a known donor/father. With sperm banks the downer is an unknown.

I don't believe that is true. My younger sister is a lesbian and her and her partner both have two kids together via artificial insemination and they know who the fathers are. They have a whole folder with all these facts about him and even a photograph.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Apparently the problem the FDA has with what he is doing is not that he's giving away sperm for free but this:

"The FDA sent Arsenault the letter late last year telling him he must stop because he does not follow the agency’s requirements for getting tested for sexually transmitted diseases within seven days before giving sperm."

It's a public-health concern.

It all comes back down to the whole consenting adults thing. Possible health concern or not, I fail to see what business it is of the government's. If consenting adults agree to engage in this activity amongst themselves then that should be their right to do so and it is also their right to bear the consequences of such actions.

 

[syrenn]

There could be legal responsibility issues for the children as he is a known donor/father. With sperm banks the downer is an unknown.

I don't believe that is true. My younger sister is a lesbian and her and her partner both have two kids together via artificial insemination and they know who the fathers are. They have a whole folder with all these facts about him and even a photograph.

Did they draw up papers saying he is dissolved of all legal rights to the child? If not, i am sure they could make a claim (if they wanted) that he is the father and must pay child support.

With sperm banks they do keep all medical records of the father.... but it is very clear... he gives up rights and ties to the sperm and its offspring.

 

[Dragon]

It all comes back down to the whole consenting adults thing. Possible health concern or not, I fail to see what business it is of the government's. If consenting adults agree to engage in this activity amongst themselves then that should be their right to do so and it is also their right to bear the consequences of such actions.

Well, I'm guessing you'd probably say the same thing about a sperm bank, though, and I quite honestly disagree. The guy is engaged in a non-profit business, essentially, or a charitable activity. Just as I think the government has an interest in making sure that food dispensed by charities (food banks, homeless shelters, etc.) is handled safely, so it has a public-health interest here. Remember that a woman infected by diseased semen may pass the same illness on to her sex partner(s) and the child, so it's not a classic consent situation; there are nonconsenting parties at risk.

 

[Skull Pilot]

It's not the government's business what a guy does with his spunk.

If women are stupid enough to accept free internet sperm then they deserve what they get.

 

[Dragon]

If women are stupid enough to accept free internet sperm then they deserve what they get.

Does her husband? Do her children?

 

[Skull Pilot]

If women are stupid enough to accept free internet sperm then they deserve what they get.

Does her husband? Do her children?

Tough shit. Don't you think her husband will know if she gets inseminated. And if she did it without his knowledge then he can divorce the bitch.