Egg Donation = Prostitution? Are You Kidding Me?

Wow, I love when people give me something to talk about.  And, this story is certainly one of them.  I understand and acknowlegde arguments made by some against egg donation because of exploitation and medical risks, but this is truly a new one. 

At a conference in the UK, Dr. Naomi Pfeffer, who researches controversial developments in medicine, told the Motherhood in the 21st Century Conference at the University College London that “The exchange relationship is analogous to that of a client and a prostitute. It’s a unique situation because it’s the only instance in which a woman exploits another woman’s body.”

Honestly, I do believe that her intentions were good as she was merely warning that increasing numbers of “vulnerable women in developed countries” were being exploited by Westerners who were desperate to conceive.  I do understand issue as stated above, and I do think that something needs to be done on that front; however, charges of prostitution by the women desperately wanting a child???  I guess it got people to listen.

She continued by stating that “Most of these women are in developing economies where access to healthcare is limited by their ability to pay. They are often vulnerable women and it’s a very unequal economic relationship.

“These women are being encouraged to take real risks with their health through ovarian stimulation and egg retrieval. It commodifies women’s bodies and treats their reproductive capacities as a service.”

Unfortunately, Pfeffer also stated that British parents should face up to the consequences of their actions. “They should know that they are using vulnerable women. These women who are buying eggs have to appreciate that the eggs don’t appear from a stork or from under a gooseberry bush.”  However, we cannot forget that many British doctors refer patients abroad if they do not want to join the NHS's three-year waiting list for donor eggs.  That is clearly a long time for any woman. 

The likely answer in all of this is not to punish the women who desperately want a child, as they too are vulnerable.  Instead, changes within the British government, as well as these other countries such as Spain, Romania, the Czech Republic, and Ukraine, need to take place to ensure that everyone is protected.

Again, just my two cents.

Subscribe to my blog here.  

Woman Implanted with Wrong Embryo & Carrying Baby to Term for Couple

A woman in Ohio was implanted with the wrong embryo eight months ago, and she and her husband decided to keep the pregnancy, despite the fact that they know that they will be saying "hello and goodbye" at the same time to the child that is not theirs. 

According to the couple, when they received the call from the doctor telling them that they were pregnant, the doctor also told them in the same sentence that it was the wrong embryo.  The doctor gave them the option to abort; however, they could not go against their religious beliefs.  I find this couple to be an honorable couple, and I hope that their journey ends well.  It appears that they intend to use their remaining embryos in a gestational carrier very soon, as the woman can no longer carry. 

A very sad story, and we hope them, as well as the child and his family, the best.  As for the IVF doctor and clinic, it was honorable that they informed the couple right away unlike Dr. Katz in California, who has since lost his license and who did not inform the woman until the child was 10 months old.  Unfortunately, providing the information right away still does not take away the damage that was done.

I am not sure what to say on this one.  I think this couple is incredible, but what an experience.  What do you think?

Subscribe to my blog here

Botched IVF Procedure at Clinic Finally Settles & Yet Another is Filed

In a bad case that just gets worse, the Laurel Fertility Clinic has settled their case with a woman who was accidentally implanted with another couple's embryos for $1 million dollars, according the the National Law Journal

In fact, this woman's law firm has now turned around and sued on behalf of a couple whose embryos were destroyed after being fertilized with another man's sperm and not her husband's.  This suit is now the fourth against a fertilitu clinic that attorney, Nancy Hersh, has filed in recent years. 

"The overarching problem," she said, "is a lack of regulation. All these mistakes appear to happen in the laboratory."

What are your thoughts?

Friday Legal Updates - Florida Personhood, UK Update, Wisconsin Surrogacy Insurance, & Croatia

Wow, can you believe that summer is officially over already?  I can't because of the blistering heat here in Southern California; however, another Friday is upon us with some legal updates for your thoughts and comments.

Florida - Last November, Colorado pro-life groups placed a ballot measure before the voters in order to extend "personhood" to the moment of conception.  This amendment was rejected by 73% of the voters in Colorado; however, the groups have now set their sites on Florida.  The new amendment would define even a newly formed embryo as a person.  The implications of this becoming law is an issue those suffering from infertility and living in Florida need to consider. 

Wisconsin - Two women have filed a case in Wisconsin where their insurers have denied them maternity coverage due to the fact that they were surrogates.  This issue is now before the State Supreme Court, so we will have to wait and see how this one ends and if it will have implications elsewhere. 

UK - Women whose embryos were to be destroyed in the next few weeks have been given an extension.  With the new HFEA of 2008, which comes into force on October 1, everyone with embryos in storage will be able to keep them there for a decade versus the previous law of 5 years.  "These new rules will come into effect on October 1 and I will be seeking to make an Order to Parliament to ensure this applies to embryos that are 'out of time' on that date."

Professor Lisa Jardine, chair of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), said: "I am delighted that the Government has listened and made this common-sense decision.

"This will be an enormous relief to all of those people who faced the heartbreak of seeing their embryos destroyed all because of a matter of timing. We will be contacting clinics immediately so that they can inform the patients concerned and make appropriate arrangements for the continued storage of their embryos."

Croatia - The government moved Thursday to amend a law involving IVF after strong criticism from human rights and parents groups over its criteria for couples entitled to treatment. 

"Under the amendments forwarded to parliament, couples will now only have to sign a notarised statement confirming they are in a relationship rather than have to prove before a court they have been together for three years, Health Minister Darko Milinovic told a cabinet session.

Also as part of the changes, children conceived by donated eggs or sperm will now be allowed to obtain information about his or her biological parents once turning 18 only if donors have given their prior agreement.

However provisions in the law which ban the freezing of embryos will not be altered.

Croatia's original legislation on medically assisted reproduction dates back to 1978, when the world's first test-tube baby was born. The former Yugoslav republic had its first IVF baby five years later."

Subscribe to my blog here.  

UCI Egg Stealing Case Appears to Have Finally Settled

According to the California Bar Journal, the case of Beasley v. Regents of the University of California has been settled for $4,230,000.00.   It states that the doctors at UCI Center for Reproductive Health were found to have engaged in the misappropriation and nonconsensual transfer of donor eggs, several of which resulted in live births.  The original case was initiated in 1995.  Look to the Orange County Courts website for case #JCCP 3213 for additional information on the actual case. 

Also, don't forget about our upcoming egg donation and surrogacy conference in San Diego on September 23, 2009

Subscribe to my blog here.

FRIDAY LEGAL UPDATES - Criminals & Adoption, Battle over Surrogacy, & California Same Sex Bill Passes

TGIF!   I hope that those who are celebrating Labor Day this long weekend have a great time - I know I will. 

New York - A history of crime and drug addiction spanning two decades should not bar a man from being able to adopt, so says a New York judge who credited the man's attempt to turn his life around.  This ruling will allow this man and his wife to be placed on the adoption list.  His last conviction was 1995, and he claims to be clean and sober since 2000 when he was released from prison.  Many think it was a good decision - what about you?  I know what Bill O'Reilly would say. 

California - Legislation authored by Senator Mark Leno that resolves ambiguities about how out-of-state same-sex marriages will be recognized in California passed the Assembly today with a 44-27 vote.

Senate Bill 54 bill clarifies that same-sex couples who married outside of California before Proposition 8 went into effect last year are recognized as married spouses, not unlike the 18,000 same-sex marriages performed in California. The legislation also confirms that same-sex couples who married outside California after Prop 8 went into effect on November 5, 2008, or plan to do so in the future, must receive the same rights, protections, benefits, obligations and responsibilities afforded to opposite-sex spouses, with the sole exception of the designation of "marriage."

Australia -  Couples dealing with infertility in Melbourne and the state of Victoria, Australia, will now require that all couples wanting to go through IVF first have a background police check.   Should the background check find any convictions for serious sex or violent crimes, past incidents of having children taken out of their care, or any other crime that is considered a potential risk to children – IVF should be forbidden to the couple.

As stated in the article, I also agree that someone with serious sex or violent crime in their past shouldn’t be raising kids; however, are they going to force everyone else in Victoria to use birth control? And only allow people to have children if they pass background checks?  Unlikely!

This law is unfairly targeting couples with infertility. It’s discrimination, and I too think it’s blatantly wrong.

Prague -    The Justice Ministry is seeking changes to legislation which would affect the legal rights of surrogate and biological mothers.

Under current Czech law, biological mothers are not guaranteed parental rights to a child born to a surrogate. The surrogate mother could gain custody rights to the child she carries and delivers.

The Justice Ministry wants to change this part of the law. "I've been thinking about changing the law since May. In the course of my career, I've met a number of clients interested in the issue," Minister for Justice Daniela Kovářová told Aktuálně.cz.

The Czech legal system permits surrogate motherhood but has no law dealing specifically with the issue.

BelgiumA Belgian couple who commissioned a surrogate mother to carry a baby for them are to appeal against a Dutch ruling awarding custody of the child to a Dutch family who bought her over the internet.

The girl’s biological father had sought a surrogate mother because his own wife was infertile. Baby Donna was born in 2005 using his sperm. However instead of handing over the baby as agreed, the surrogate mother said she had miscarried and sold the baby to a Dutch couple in Leusden.

Since then, baby Donna has been the subject of a string of court cases in Belgium and the Netherlands. Last year, a court in Arnhem gave the man the right to visit his biological child but turned down his demand that the child be returned to him.

The Belgian couple, who live in Antwerp, have always regarded themselves as the child's real parents. They call her Valentina.

Don't forget that Surrogacy Lawyer, Theresa M. Erickson, is conducting an online seminar about Surrogacy and Egg Donation to air on September 23, 2009

For additional information on The Surrogacy & Egg Donation Seminar please contact Sabrina Scialpi at 858-748-4133 or visit
www.ericksonlaw.net/surrogacy_egg_donation_seminar.html

Friday Legal Updates - Surrogacy Legal Battles, Federal Suit Blocking Embryos Research, & Sperm "Brokers"

Good Morning and TGIF to all!   Hope you are well.   Morning radio show starts in about an hour, so here are your Friday Legal Updates.  They are mostly international stories with a federal law suit just filed also added.  Enjoy!

United States - Federal Law Suit Filed to block federally funded human embryo reserach.  "A group of plaintiffs filed a federal lawsuit today in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to "enjoin and overturn the controversial guidelines for public funding of embryonic stem cell research that the National Institutes of Health issued on July 7, 2009," according to a press statement...."

It will be interesting to watch this suit play out.  What are your thoughts on stem cell research?

UK - Two directors of a fertility company appeared in court yesterday accused of illegally delivering sperm to women by courier.  They are to appear in court next month.  This is a test case under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act of "procuring sperm".  They face two years in jail. 

Australia - A couple must battle the courts to adopt their own son.  I blogged on this case already, but I wanted to repost as I really feel for this couple.  Grandma carried her grandson for her daughter.  Apparently, surrogacy law in NSW has not kept up with science. 

Poland - A surrogate mother is fighting for custody of the child that she gave birth to for another couple from Warsaw.  Polish law does not regulate surrogacy, and despite a written agreement, this looks like a battle for this couple with their gestational carrier.

Uruguay - Uruguay is one step closer to becoming the first country in Latin America to permit same-sex couples to adopt children.  Uruguay had authorized same-sex civil unions last year.

New Zealand - Parents of surrogate born daughter battle to bring her home from Thailand.  The couple is heartbroken as the little girl is the daughter of the Thai surrogate in New Zealand, but the couple are her parents in Thailand.  The couple claims to sought legal advice, but this unfortunately looks like another issue with fertility tourism in certain countries.

Subscribe to my blog at: http://www.surrogacyeggdonorblog.com/subscribe.html

Fertility Tourism - Where Do You Go From Here?

Depending upon who you talk to - fertility tourism may or may not be a good thing?  In my opinion, if you are working with a reputable clinic/company, it is a good thing.  But, where do you find these clinics, and how do you truly know if they are reputable, success, etc. as it may be the clinic/company themselves posing as a patient on a forum?  As I noted in an earlier blog piece, I was appalled (naively, I must admit) that this sort of unethical practice is going on here right in my own back yard. 

Besides those forums, I think that Parents, Surrogates, and Donors must absolutely EDUCATE and INFORM themselves, instead of becoming another horror story.  Not everyone has the funds to keep trying once things go badly. 

In fact, I will be speaking on this on my radio show, Surrogacy Lawyer Radio on Blog Talk Radio this Friday on how to ask the right questions, get referrals (not just via the internet), and ask more questions. 

In addition, my recent concern over fertility tourism outside of the US, where I am very familiar and aware of reputations, etc. is a blog post written by a woman with alot of information regarding India.  Note, she did get her child from India via surrogacy, but she had alot of concerns, as did the comments from others.  It is worth a read.

Subscribe to my blog here

 

FRIDAY LEGAL UPDATE - The Donation of Gametes and the Donation of Kidneys - Where Do We Draw the Line?

After reading an interesting commentary posted on MSNBC involving a gentleman that claims to have sold his kidney for $20,000.00 to another man in New York who had no chance of living without it, I started thinking about how this story may or may not be used against egg and sperm donation solely on the basis of compensation (this is not meant to address any issues regarding medical procedures, duress, the rights of donor conceived children, etc. in this post - we will address that at another time).

It appears that this gentleman and the New York man concocted a story to cover what was truly happening so that the doctors would proceed with the donation.  In fact, they claimed to be cousins and an intermediary was used.

Now, the paying for the donation of organs has been outlawed in the US for quite some time, while the UK has just set in place a new law banning of private organ transplants from dead donors to allay fears that prospective recipients can buy their way to the front of the line.

They even submitted a government-commissioned report that recommended that organs donated within the state-run National Health Service should stay within the public health system, even though very few Britons have private transplants.  In fact, the new rules will mainly stop overseas patients from coming to Britain and paying privately for a transplant. 

On the other hand, gamete donation for compensation has also been banned in several countries, such as Canada, for quite some time, but where do we draw line between what we can be compensated for and what not?  What about participating in a research program for a new drug or therapy?

Now, let’s get back to this gentleman from Israel, who believes that he has done something great and earned money along the way.  And, he does have two kidneys, doesn’t he?  (Personally, I would like to keep both of mine as a back-up, but that is just me.)  Does he have the right to sell something that he can function without? 

I did submit my vote in an online poll (I will not divulge my answer), and this is the current standing as of now:
 
1. Yes, absolutely. It's dangerous and unfair to go outside the approved system for organ donation – 20.3%.
2. No. I think people who need an organ should be able to pursue all options – 70.8%.
3. I don't know. It's a complex topic – 8.9%.

This topic, although dealing with organs versus gametes and the process in which they are obtained, is certainly going to continue to be debated; however, I want to know what you think?  Where do we draw the law on what can be compensated for and what cannot be compensated for?  And, why do we care?  I do not have the answer; I am just asking the questions.  Let me know what you think?

Subscribe to my blog here

UPDATE - Whew...Woman "Pregnant" with 12 Babies is NOT true!

I don’t think that I ever hoped that someone was NOT pregnant, but this case certainly was one.  And, now she has been exposed as a “fraud” – thank goodness for those “babies.” 

Apparently, officials in Tunsania interviewed her – they found her not to be pregnant.  They also think that she has some psychological issues, as she is likely not even pregnant with one baby.  I will not even get into the issue of psychology in this post, as the officials were more focused on the fraud then on the fact that this woman may have fertility problems.  (Side note: I hope that they get her some psychological help if needed)

First, what surprised me was that her husband had been quoted in the last article – interesting, as he should know that she is pregnant or not, or so I would hope.  This fact points more to fraud as they were likely trying to cash in on a story.

Secondly, I was surprised that Dr. Manny Alvarez from Fox News stated that any pregnancy over five babies is “high risk.”  "When you get to a pregnancy with that many multiples, often some of them spontaneously die," Alvarez said. "Anything more than five babies becomes a very high-risk pregnancy. The rates of premature labor for multiples are astronomical."

Fox News, please do not pass that sort of information around, as I am certain that many, if not all, doctors would disagree with that number, which appears to be awfully high.  We certainly do not want to be informing people that up to five babies is okay, especially after the “Octomom.” Again, I am not a doctor of any type, but I am certain they would all agree with me.  

As I included in my comment of Monday from Dr. David Kreiner (FACOGI), I wanted to remind everyone the following from him: “I site the SART recommendations on the number of embryos transferred and my endorsement of making this a regulation. I talk about the benefits of IVF where one can control the number of embryos transferred compared to IUI where as many eggs as you make can fertilize and implant. I am sure you know that 99% of REIs were absolutely against that 6 embryos were transferred into one woman. Perhaps this Tunisian pregnancy of a dozen implanted embryos should teach us that it is cheaper for insurance companies, the government and society to support IVF treatment rather than put people in a position where they feel compelled to play roulette with their lives by doing gonadotropins and IUIs rather than IVF.”

Well, thankfully for all involved, this story was untrue!

Subscribe to my blog here.  

Cheaper by the Dozen? Pregnant with 12 Babies? Come On, Didn't the "Octomom" Teach Them Anything?

All I can say this morning, is come on, people!  Thank goodness this is not in the US....did the "Octomom" not teach everyone a good lesson. 

So, for those of you who have not heard, a woman in Gafsa, Tunisia is apparently pregnant with 12 babies.  No one is certain how the 12 were conceived, but Dr. Dr. Mark Hamilton, of the British Fertility Society thinks that "the woman could have been receiving ovulation induction treatment, which stimulates egg production. You don't have the same control as with IVF."  But, again, there is a responsibility on behalf of the clinic when the follicle count is that high.  Don't you think?  Or, am I way off base?

The teacher, who has not yet been named, is expecting six boys and six girls, according to reports. She conceived the babies following fertility treatments, after suffering a number of miscarriages.  Fertility experts confirmed the extraordinary pregnancy was possible, but carried "colossal" risks - really?  We did not know that.  

Sorry for being cynical, but I certainly hope that this is not some hope for a reality show. 

According to Fox News and Dr. Manny Alvarez, managing health editor of FOXNews.com, he said it is possible for someone to be pregnant with 12 babies, and he has in fact seen a woman pregnant with nine babies. However, the likelihood of this woman carrying all 12 babies to term is very slim.

"When you get to a pregnancy with that many multiples, often some of them spontaneously die," Alvarez said. "Anything more than five babies becomes a very high-risk pregnancy."

If the woman does succeed in carrying a majority of the babies to term, Alvarez said she will need constant monitoring, and will more than likely need to be hospitilized.

"The rates of premature labor for multiples are astronomical," he added."

Nadya Suleman of Bellflower, Calif., currently holds the record for the longest-living octuplets in history.

Subscribe to my blog here.

Friday Legal Updates - California Bill, Chicago Scammer, Ohio (oh, my), DC & same sex couples, & International Issues

Hello!   I am back after a two week hiatus on my Friday Legal Updates, but it is summer so the wheels of justice turn slowly, as does legislation.  Either way, here are today's updates for the last few weeks:

California - The California Legislature is getting back into the Prop 8 fight with a bill that would recognize those same-sex marriages performed legally outside of California before the measure had passed.  SB54 also intends to ensure that gay and lesbian couples who have been married legally in other states and countries since November 5th when Prop 8 became official can receive all the rights and obligations that opposite sex Californian couples enjoy.

Illinois - More couples are coming out of the woodwork regarding a surrogate who had scammed them into believing that she was pregnant with their baby.  Beware!

Ohio - A Republican lawmaker in Ohio is re-introducing a bill that would give a man the final choice on whether the woman he got pregnant can have an abortion.  I am so "impressed" that a man can force a woman to keep the baby, but the bill mentions nothing about forcing him to be a good father or provide financial stability. 

DC - A new DC law is making it alot easier for a newborn to have two moms at birth.  Lesbians who create a child via artificial insemination will no longer have to adopt their children that have been born to their partners.  A similar law is to go into effect in New Mexico in 2010.  This is a huge step for same sex couples, as they do not have to go through the time consuming and expensive legal process that is not required of heterosexual couples who use artificial insemination. 

Croatia - Croatia continues to tighten their laws on fertility treatments by forbiding the freezing of embryos.  It also limits the number of embryos used to three and for unmarried couples, they must prove that they have been together for at least three years. 

Romania - 30 Israelis were detained in an egg trafficking case.  It sounds like the issue is on its way to being resolved from more recent reports; however, I certainly hope that this is not an issue of human trafficking. 

Subscribe to my blog here.  

The Debate on Justice Sotomayor is About to Come to a Vote - How Does This Affect Us?

Hello, I am finally back after a long trip away in Europe. And, just in time since it appears the vote on Sotomayor will happen today.  I wanted to reiterate my previous post regarding how she may or may not vote in this area of Assisted ReproductionSee previous post here.  

In addition, since the California case involving Prop 8 may also come before her as a justice, her views will be very important to those this would affect.  On the other hand, it is clear from the news that the Department of Justice is trying very hard to get this out of the federal court system.  We will have to see where this goes in the coming months. 

Subscribe to my blog here

Who is Entitled to Becoming a Parent? Does Age, Marital Status or Sexual Orientation Matter?

I have been pondering all of the recent media attention regarding acccess to IVF and age, remember the "World's Oldest Mom," and Michael Jackson's children created via IVF and surrogacy (and possibly egg donor and/or sperm donor).  Again, I am surprised by the number of people who want to restrict access to IVF, or more importantly access to having a family.  They want age limits, marital status limits, as well as sexual orientation limitations. 

Now, for those of us who have families, we may or may not have walked in the shoes of those that cannot have children on their own without the help of medical intervention or adoption.  But, I will tell you that I am not any more entitled to having my children than Michael Jackson or even Maria del Carmen Brousada.  Why, you may ask? Because having a family is something that is inate in all of us - albeit some stronger than others.  And, when I have stated in the past that it is a biological imperative, I do not mean the need to pass on genes - I mean the inate human desire deep in our DNA to have a family - to be a part of something bigger than ourselves. 

With that in mind, why should gays and lesbians be restricted to having children via IVF or adoption?  In fact, a study recently out of Tufts University School of Medicine stated that they found "overwhelming" that these children of same sex couples do as well as those children of heterosexual parents.   

Now, back to the age issue, do I think that this woman had a right to treatment?  Yes, I do; but, I also think that her age placed her and her children into harm’s way as far as their health during the pregnancy was concerned.  And, should are worry carry over into being concerned for their health and livelihood after her death?  Well, I did not know Maria, nor do I know if she provided for them financially after her death or if she provided them with guardians who will love and take care of them as if they were their own.   But, this is an issue again that all parents must deal with one way or another regardless of age - her risk factors were just higher. 

As for Michael Jackson, we are learning so much more about the life that he too created with these children whom he dearly loved and wanted to protect from the media spotlight.  Let's take out all of the allegations of child molestation for a minute and only address those children.  Should he have children because he wants them or because he can afford them?  Or, should he be able to have children so long as the allegations were not proven? 

Oh, and by the way, all of those pundits out there claiming he is not the father since he did not adopt them - you are way off base.  Adoptive and foster parents also do not need to worry since surrogacy, egg donation, and sperm donation is a different area of law, specifically here in California.  Whether he used sperm donors, egg donors and/or surrogates, he is the father of these children, with Debbie Rowe being the only possible outsider with a chance at custody.  And, despite reports she did not make Michael the adoptive father by signing away her rights - and no need for an adoption. 

Ultimately, as a country, we do need to take all of this into consideration, but we also need to allow doctors and their patients to make the best decisions for their family, their bodies, and, most of all - the children that we are creating. 

What are your thoughts on today's ponderings?

Subscribe to my blog here.

Friday Legal Updates - Fertilty & Insurance, NY Stalls Same Sex Bill, Kansas Agency, Baby Scammer, Embryo Dispute, Custody Battle & Adoption Agency Bankruptcy

Yes!  It is finally Friday, and I am ready for the weekend.  Remember, it is less than two weeks to our conference in Switzerland.  Alot of updates this week, so enjoy....

1.   California - The District Court of Appeal has thrown out an appeal by a woman struggling to conceive a chiled via IVF.  She was challenging the limited coverage provided for fertility treatment by her employer's group health care plan.  InYeager v. Blue Cross of California, she alleged causes of action for unfair competition and false advertising.  Although the employer chose not to offer $2000.00 of infertility coverage, Yeager went after Blue Cross for these above reasons, including stating that the $2000.00 offered by BC does not constitute coverage under the statute. 

2.   Kansas - Clients say that a surrogacy agency in Kansas has kept their money. "The owner of the agency, Michelle Faulkenberry, stopped returning calls from Winters and the couple, and stopped reimbursing Winters for her expenses, Winters said.

Court documents, interviews with clients and surrogates and an affidavit by a Wichita Police Department detective show complaints dating to 2001 that Faulkenberry dipped into clients' escrow accounts -- money meant to cover medical bills and other expenses -- for her own use. Faulkenberry declined to comment for this story.  Her agency, Alternative Family Building, was the second surrogate agency that Faulkenberry had started and closed, court records show.Unlike 29 other states that have some laws regarding surrogacy -- most of which void paid contracts -- Kansas does not regulate such agencies." 

In fact, the article continues with this: "Looking back, Mike said there were signs that Alternative Family Building might not have been as legitimate as some other agencies. For one, he said, Alternative Family Building's fees were much lower.  "The fees were low enough that I figured it was worth the risk," he said.

3.   Chicago, IL - Day in court for accused baby dreams scammer - A 31-year-old Chicago woman is accused of using the Internet to take advantage of desperate people.

WBBM's Steve Miller has the story of that woman - and the people who believe she should be put away forever.
 
Her name is Teandrea Watson, and she has billed herself as a surrogate mother. A beauty pageant queen. A graphic designer.  Others say Watson robbed them of their dreams - after she signed a contract to be a surrogate mother.

Teandrea Watson appears in court today, accused of cheating that man from Maryland, and his wife, out of money - and a baby they so desperately wanted.

4.   OhioEmbryo Dispute detailed in Lawsuit - Lori Johnson was excited about trying to have her third child and ecstatic that Montgomery's Bonnie Bernard would help.  "

Bernard operates a company called Embryos Alive out of her Pfeiffer Road home that links embryo donors with people like Johnson, an infertile Texas wife. "It seemed like one of those things that was too good to be true," Johnson said.  Initially impressed by Embryos Alive, Johnson eventually came to feel she was bullied by a "callous" Bernard.

A lawsuit filed by Johnson in Hamilton County - against Embryos Alive, Bonnie Bernard, her husband, Gary Bernard, and another relative, Scott Hasselring - accuses Bernard of turning on Johnson after she challenged what she considered improper procedures by the company.

"I felt taken advantage of," Johnson said. "People who suffer from infertility have a painful and costly journey. To have someone give you hope and then take your money in exchange for that hope ... is definitely salt in the wounds."  Johnson alleges Bernard and Embryos Alive defamed her with false postings on the Embryos Alive online support group board, breach of contract and consumers sales laws, fraud and misrepresentation.

5.   Florida - Two Gay Couples Fight over Custody of Child -  "Two dads face off against two moms. It's perhaps the most unique custody battle in recent Florida history and maybe the most radical verdict. Katherine and her eight-year partner, Ana Sobrino, decided to have a baby about a half-decade ago. Again and again, they tried using sperm from anonymous donors. But Katherine — a driven real estate agent then in her late 30s — couldn't get pregnant.

Enter their close friend, Ray, a handsome, gay Air Force veteran.

After some casual negotiation, he donated and Katherine conceived. In August 2006, a sweet and burbling baby whom we'll call Austin was born. Katherine put Ray's name on the birth certificate because she wanted the child to know his dad's identity - That turns out to be a big mistake.

The baby was raised mostly by Katherine and Ana at their NE 24th Street home, but Ray and his partner Craig also spent time with the boy. "[Ray] made it clear he wanted to be involved in the child's life," a counselor later wrote. He took Austin to baby music lessons. Sometimes the child would sleep over at his "da-da's" apartment overlooking a canal. Then, last fall, the mothers decided to move to California, and things got ugly.

Ray sued Katherine in November 2008. The case tells the story of two sets of gay parents — all of them loving and active in the child's life — vying for custody. "Responsibility for the child should be awarded to the mother and father equally," Ray demanded in the suit. "[I am] the natural father." 

After considering arguments from both sides, Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Leon Firtel on June 3 found Ray was nothing more than a sperm donor. Because there was no contract before birth, he had "no rights." Says Ray's attorney, "[The ruling] is the most tragic of my career, and I will not rest until Ray is reunited with his son."

Opposing council responds that Ray surrendered his role when he let the mothers become primary caregivers: "Ray has changed his mind about his parental role... Katherine and Ana feel like their family unit is being attacked."  A motion for reconsideration is scheduled in circuit court this week.

6.   New York - Gov. Paterson will delay his plan to force a vote on a bill to legalize same-sex marriage until early September because the Senate is too unsettled now to take it up, his spokesman said on Friday. 

“Governor Paterson believes that marriage equality is an important civil rights issue and will be working with Senate leaders to move the process forward,” said the spokesman, Peter E. Kauffmann, adding that the governor was more immediately focused on the state’s dwindling tax revenues.  Mr. Kauffmann said the governor would probably call a special legislative session in early September so lawmakers could close an anticipated hole in the state’s budget.

7.   Canada - Adoption Agency's Bankruptcy strands families -  An Ontario agency specializing in adoptions from Africa has gone bankrupt, leaving scores of families across Canada disappointed and in financial debt.  Kids Link, which operates as the Imagine adoption agency in Cambridge, put up a bankruptcy notice on their website on Monday to inform their roster of more than 200 clients of their financial difficulties.  

An official with the Waterloo Regional Police fraud department told ctvtoronto.ca that he has received many calls from clients of the agency who are worried that their money was stolen."I can tell you it's not a criminal investigation," said Sgt. Robert Zensner. "We are not investigating anyone in the company or anyone linked to the agency."  He said that could change once BDO completes their review of the agency's books.  "If they find any criminality than they would contact us but we have to wait for their review," he said. "At this point, we're hands off."

That's it!  Have a great weekend.

Subscribe to my blog here

Friday Legal Updates - Donor Offspring, IVF Blunder in UK, Michigan Embryo Legislation & More

Well, another week has come and gone, but for those of us who are Americans, next week is the 4th of July, which means family celebrations for most.  Today, I want to tell those who are still longing for a family of their own that there is hope.  Be patient, get educated, and hang in there. 

Now, onto the updates:

Iowa - Dead Iowan Father's Child - will his daughter receive survivor benefits.  In a case similar to the one that I addressed here in California last week on my blog, her mother is trying to fight for Social Security Survivor Benefits for Byrnn, now 6, conceived through IVF two years after her father died.  Again, this result is based on 150 year old Iowa law, as in the California and Arizona case, but her mother is challenging the decision - and she intends to take it all the way to the US Supreme Court. 

My take on this - make certain estate planning documents are in order for the future use of your genetic material, although it would not have made a difference in this particular case. 

Michigan - Michigan Lawmakers Prepare Bills to Monitor the activities surrounding the donation and destruction of embryos.  The one bill in particular is called the Embryo Research and Fertility Clinic Transparency Act (Senate Bills 647-652)

New York - Fertility Authority has received investments totalling $500,000.00

"7.3 Million Americans struggle with fertility issues and are looking for quality information and support that only www.fertilityauthority.com provides. The $4 Billion fertility industry is without a "go-to" source for accurate and up-to-the minute content. FertilityAuthority.com was launched on February 25, 2009 and has not looked back. CEO Gina Bartasi says, "Our goal has always been to provide the best fertility content on the web, and users are recognizing the quality of our site. Investors have witnessed our early success and want to be a part of our future growth."

The funds will be used to enhance the site's technology, boost revenue capabilities, generate additional content and continue to aggressively build traffic. Bartasi has not ruled out an institutional raise adding "Our clients are asking us for custom websites, online appointment booking software, expanded video content and additional technological innovation that will help their businesses grow. Our focus is to serve their needs and exceed their expectations". New clients that have already put their confidence in FertilityAuthority.com include several prominent regional fertility centers as well as specialty pharmaceutical firms Columbia Laboratories and Ferring Pharmaceuticals. "

United Kingdom - Why Am I Dark, Daddy?  Another IVF blunder in the UK haunts another family. 

"When ten-year-old Michael Williams climbs into his father Keith's arms for a goodnight cuddle, he will often ask the same dreaded question: 'Why am I brown?' Looking up into his father's blue eyes and taking in his light brown hair and fair skin, his son will then ask: 'How can I make myself lighter, like you?'

Keith doesn't know how to answer these questions, so he'll make a joke about how Michael was delivered by a stork or that he was found under a gooseberry bush. Anything to avoid having to tell him the truth.

For the reality is that not only was Michael conceived via IVF using donor sperm, but there was a terrible mix-up when the wrong sperm was mistakenly used by the hospital fertility clinic the couple attended in their hope of becoming parents. "

Canada - Canadian Donor Offspring has created an initiative in response to the lawsuit filed by Olivia Pratten back in October of 2008.  The site is an attempt to fundraise on her behalf, as well as others in her situation.  The site is located here.  What are your thoughts on this issue?

Subscribe to my blog here.  

Egg Donor Anonymity & Privacy & the Reality of the Google World

I spent the evening last night finally spending some time reviewing some fertility blogs and websites.  I was actually surprised by some of the "promises" that were being made to egg donors in relation to their donation of their eggs to recipient parents.  In fact, some claim that the information is shredded once a donation is over and/or their information is not released to other agencies or clinics.  I am not really certain how that protects the privacy of the donors in all situations. 

I think it is important that those in this industry make certain that we advise egg donors that we cannot ever completely guarantee privacy and anonymity.  Yes, the clinics follow the HIPPA rules for the most part, and my office falls under attorney-client privilege rules; however, no one can absolutely be guarantee any privacy.

Why, you may ask?  Because when an egg donor fills out her profile, she wants to make certain that some of her accomplishments, etc. are highlighted.  By doing so, she makes herself searchable via Google or now Bing.   Even when a donor places limited information on her profile, the advent of Facebook, Twitter, My Space, and Google make it very hard for any of us to stay hidden for long. 

Well, with this in mind, what is my advice?  Just be prudent with your information and understand that you can be found - BUT, and this is a big BUT, is unlikely to happen in the near future.  Specifically, it is unlikely that the Intended Parents will try and locate you, although it is always a possibility. 

Now, what about the resulting child?  What if their parent shares the information with them as they get older to satisfy their curiosity or they find the profile in a safe?  Disclosure is becoming more common, as we all know in this industry, and donors need to be aware that this can occur. 

Should you as a donor be concerned?   Well, I can tell you from personal experience that it is not such a bad thing.  I was located, and I am fine with it, as the family did not expect anything from me, except that they were happy that I am there if there is a medical need.  No relationship beyond that, and I have no legal responsibility to these children.  But, as a donor, I do believe that I have a personal ethical responsibility to be available for information in the future.  I am not afraid of the choices that I made, even though I was not advised of this when I donated, although this was in the advent of this entire industry. 

In summary, the purpose of this article is not meant to scare away egg donors, as they are desperately needed by families who cannot have families without them; but as a donor, be aware, be prepared and go into this with your eyes wide open to the future.  Educate yourself and know what you are agreeing to while knowing the wonderful gift that you are providing a family. 

Subscribe to my blog at: http://www.surrogacyeggdonorblog.com/subscribe.html

Friday Legal Updates - Posthumous Conception and Social Security & Conference Reminder

Well, it is Friday again - TGIF to everyone.  Not alot on the legal front this week, despite the continuous chatter about the IVF blunders over in the UK, as I commented on this week in my blog entitled Embryo Mix-Up, Resulting Abortion, and Adequate Justice?.   But, I do not want to beat a dead horse, so today's singular topic is sperm donation.

California - The Ninth Circuit has determined that posthumous conception DOES NOT entitle one to survivor benefits.  In a case involving a 10 year old girl, her mother was trying to get Social Security Survivor Benefits for the girl who was conceived via sperm extracted from her just deceased husband in 1995.  

"The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday the child, Brandalynn Vernoff, was not dependent on her father at the time of his death. In California, dependency is determined by the parent-child relationship rather than the marital status of the parents, according to the decision."

Further, the article stated, "

James Raetz, one of Gabriela Vernoff’s attorneys, said California has a system set up to protect sperm bank donors, and this case is an unintended consequence of the law.

Bruce Vernoff’s sperm was removed after his death, and there was no evidence of plans for a birth after the father’s death, according to court documents.

“That’s the big distinction,” Raetz said. “The court really hung on that.”

However, Raetz said, the couple did have plans for a baby.

“No matter what, she’s a single mom trying to raise her daughter,” he said."

Interestingly, I did not in another blog on this issue, that in Arizona the result may have been different

"In California, dependency is determined by the parent-child relationship rather than the marital status of the parents, according to the decision."

"While her appeal was pending, the Ninth Circuit decided Gillett-Netting v. Barnhart, 371 F.3d 593 (9th Cir. 2004), which held that a set of posthumously-conceived twins were the deemed dependents of their biological father and entitled to survivor benefits.

The administration subsequently issued an “acquiescence ruling” to the decision, noting that in the Ninth Circuit a child must be biologically related to the insured and the insured's child under applicable state law to be a deemed dependent.

Writing for the appellate court yesterday, Senior Judge Cynthia Holcomb Hall explained that Gillett-Netting was based on Arizona state law, which recognizes "[e]very child [as] the legitimate child of its natural parents," but that California law does not equate natural parent status with biological parenthood."

"So, Gabriela tried to invoke "equal protection". After all, Bandalynn would have "rights" in Arizona she doesn't have in California, and other children in California get survivor benefits, but the court didn't go for it. "

What are your thoughts on this one?

Also, don't forget about registering for our conference - Erickson Law and Conceptual Options, a Center for Surrogacy & Egg Donation Announces European Conference on Surrogacy & Egg Donation  at http://www.surrogacy-eggdonation.com/geneve.convention.html

The American Fertility Association & The Frozen Embryo Dilemma

With so much in the press these days about donor anonymity and how to handle that in the future, I wanted to post an article from the AFA that also talks about how to deal with the future issues in ART.  Enjoy, and let me know your thoughts!

"A Matter of Privacy, Responsibility and Choice

It’s a private issue gone very public. It’s a complex web of personal philosophy, religious orientation and social conscience about which everybody, and we mean everybody, has a strong opinion. But the fact is, and should be, what you do with the frozen embryos you don’t use is your decision and yours alone.

Of course it never feels like the quite right time to discuss this touchy topic.

Maybe you’re taking your first steps on the infertility treatment path. Along with all the mind-numbingly complicated instructions, you’re handed a form asking you what to do with excess embryos before you have a single one.

Maybe you already beat the odds. With absolute devotion, you danced the assisted reproduction tango, created viable embryos and made a baby. Or two or three. Your family is complete. Your head is bursting with school, soccer, recitals and bedtimes. Frozen embryos?

Or maybe you’ve given up on treatment, leaving behind the heartbreak, the disappointment and possibly, a few fertilized eggs. You’ve moved on.

So chances are pretty good that those embryos, protected in liquid nitrogen, aren’t at the top of your to-do list. None of us who have experienced infertility anticipates having any embryos, let alone extras. After we’re done with ART, we tend to ignore or deny the delicate question of disposition of the unexpected surplus.

At some point, though, all of us with cryopreserved embryos will have to make a final and forever decision about them. It’s not easy. They’re our unique responsibility and our unique burden. Because while our embryos remain suspended in time, we don’t.

Hence, this fact sheet, a guide to anticipating some of the quandaries we confront and exploring the choices we have.

The Options

A good initial cryopresevation consent agreement usually outlines three disposition choices:

  • Thawing without intent to transfer. Lucinda Veeck, M.L.T.,D.Sc., Director of Embryology at the Center for Reproductive Medicine and Infertility in New York City, says at her program, 53% of the 364 patients who have gone through with their choice have elected this option.
  • Donation for research. While raging controversy and federal limits have restricted directed giving to stem cell research, there are myriad other well-accepted research initiatives, such as staining for DNA and genetic analysis that rely on embryos. And despite the ban on federal funding for stem cell work, privately funded institutions are moving forward. Reports Dr. Michael Alper of Boston IVF, one such center, “There is no shortage of donations.
    At CRMI, Dr. Veeck reports that about 41% of patients have gone the research route.
  • Donation to other infertile people. Logistically and emotionally complex, donation for transfer has its own guidelines established by the American Society of Reproductive Medicine. It’s a many-layered effort by both the donors and recipients, requiring a six-month quarantine of the embryo, blood and genetic testing and retesting of donors, blood tests for the recipients. Both parties must sign informed consent documents addressing relinquishment and acceptance of parental rights should children result, as well as liability, among other things. Whether or not it is an anonymous transaction, both donors and recipients are strongly urged to get psychological counseling.
    “We’ve only donated embryos from two patients because of the difficulties inherent to follow-up testing,” remarks Dr. Veeck. “And in the 6% group desiring to donate, most have not actually given away their embryos yet.”

How Was I Supposed To Know?

These days, even before there’s an embryo, there’s the consent form. That daunting document demanding that a patient know, ahead of time, what to do with remaining embryos…if there are any. For infertile people, that’s one incomprehensibly huge “if.”

So hopeful patients fill in the blanks with the best intentions. The rub is that when it actually comes time to act on that initial agreement, people often find that first choice isn’t the one they want after all. It’s important to remember that first consent form is not the actual disposition form. You can shift gears at any time.

Changes of heart happen for a million different reasons: divorce, the death of a spouse, economic hardship, a multiple birth after the first cycle. Sometimes the partners in a relationship simply aren’t on the same page – one may want more children, the other has no interest. One partner may see the embryos as their potential children, the other regards them as left over sperm and eggs.

Inevitably, life’s constant evolution leads to embryos that sit, sometimes for an embarrassingly long time.

“People have them frozen and then forget about them,” says Dr. David Hoffman, Medical Director at IVF Florida/Reproductive Associates in Margate, Florida. “But they still don’t want to get rid of them. I don’t think patients think of a frozen embryo as a person, but it’s tough to let go.”

Dr. Veeck adds, “Many patients respond by doing nothing. They continue paying for storage fees rather than make a decision. And I think that’s the appropriate thing until they’re quite sure what they want to do.”

Behind the Choices

The language of disposition seems straightforward and precise. In fact, most people are sandbagged by how profoundly affected, confused and conflicted they are when it comes time to commit.

So, most elect to do nothing. Make no mistake; doing nothing is making a decision. Endless postponements means someone else-a family member or the clinic—may get stuck on the horns of what is rightfully your dilemma.

Overwhelmingly, frozen embryos are intended for use by the couples that created them. But IVF centers around the country report that the sheer number in storage is putting a squeeze on space, with some embryos in residence for a decade or more. Increasingly, centers are attempting to contact patients who haven’t been active for several years. It can be an onerous and difficult task, and on occasion, pointless.

At CRMI, Dr. Veeck puts the abandonment rate at about 10%. That’s after three registered letters, using search agencies and making countless phone calls.

Not all clinics have the wherewithal or the intention of going to such lengths. But most clinics will not dispose of embryos without an explicit, legal go-ahead from patients.
For the most part, says Dr. Hoffman, “couples usually pop up out of nowhere” when they’re notified that unless they respond, the embryos will be discarded.

Contrary to all the hype, Dr. Hoffman notes there are “very few not spoken for. The government thinks there are huge numbers out there. But there aren’t a lot of abandoned embryos at all.”

In other words, the vast majority of us with excess embryos are left to wrestle with our personal convictions and moral codes.

What Gives Meaning

For some people, contributing their embryos to research in an effort to help others gives them a sense that their assisted reproductive efforts have lasting value. “It’s a way of giving back to medicine and it makes them feel good,” says Dr. Alper of Boston IVF.

For others non-viable thawing provides closure. “It’s interesting, but people are very relieved when their embryos are discarded,” observes Adele Kauffman, Ph.D., and program psychologist at Reproductive Science Center in Waltham and Boston. “Embryos in the freezer are unfinished business. Once it’s done, they feel they’ve come full circle.”

Still others, impelled by altruism, empathy, or religious beliefs to help other infertile people, want to offer their frozen fertilized eggs for transfer.

“Initially, I thought it would be the option everyone would choose,” says Dr. Veeck at CRMI. “But when they think that they might have offspring out there and not know them or how they’re going to be brought up, they usually reconsider.”

In a recently published article, Dr. Craig Syrop at the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, notes that

Of 365 couples with embryos stored after two years, 12% “indicated a willingness to donate to other couples (was) nearly equal to the desire of couples to donate to research.” But, he finds, when faced with the “reality of clinic visits for counseling, STD testing, and informed consent before embryos are donated and utilized” interest wanes and research outstrips donation to others by nearly 2 to 1.

The Donation Drama

Embryo donation for transfer is a media magnet, drawing tremendous attention when some began referring to transfer donation as “embryo adoption.” It is not.

“Adoption is a specific legal framework with specific guidelines around parental rights and obligations and applies to only living children,” says Susan Crockin, a Boston area attorney specializing in reproductive matters. She calls donation for transfer a “positive, but limited” option. She notes that five states have laws on the books dealing with this form of embryo donation, but nowhere is it the legal equivalent of adoption.

While the federal government is on the cusp of launching public education campaign advocating “embryo adoption,” Crockin calls it a misnomer that may make people feel good but “glosses over the legal reality.” At a minimum she recommends a legal agreement between donor and recipient; and consider, in those states without an embryo donation law, that the recipients go to court to have themselves declared the parents of a resulting offspring to avert the risk of custodial claims by the genetic parents or the extended family.

However, things blur on the psychosocial front where, psychologists say, the adoption parallel is stronger.

Embryo donors and recipients should expect that resulting offspring will want information about their genealogy, their genetic makeup, and their biological parents. Donors must be prepared for the possibility of a knock on their door one day even if the transaction was strictly anonymous. As decades of experience with adoption have shown, kids will come searching. Furthermore, laws protecting anonymity are subject to change.

“We’re in uncharted territory here,” said Dr. Elaine Gordon, a Los Angeles psychologist. Dr. Gordon says she’s getting more inquiries about embryo donation for transfer but many go nowhere.

“They find it too complicated and overwhelming in terms of what’s required,” she observes. “If they’re going to do it right, does it mean engaging in a relationship with the recipient couple and do they want to participate in that?”

She suggests that “responsibly done” ovum donation might provide the best model, with both parties entering into a “contract detailing terms of contact, if any, and information disclosed and exchanged. If the two parties can come to a meeting of the minds, the exchange can take place, facilitated by psychological, medical and legal experts.”

Embryo Donation Programs

There are several embryo donation programs, including the Christian faith-based agency, Snowflakes, that promotes “adoption.” At the root, all the programs facilitate matching donors with potential recipients and work through the details of the exchange.

“We’re a private (non-sectarian) agency and we liaise between the recipient and the donor,” explains Eileen Dover, executive director of Genesis Family Services in Holly Pond, Alabama.

Recipients send in a $100 application fee, list their requirements and are put on a waiting list until the right match pops up. The total agency cost to recipients is $1,800 but they’re also responsible for shipping, donor medical testing, notary feels, and a flat $250 attorney fee. Donors, who also can specify requirements for a receiving family, fill in a standard questionnaire, including medical history. Genesis’ simple-language but comprehensive contract requires adherence to the ASRM guidelines, but the agency leaves that to the donor’s doctor.

While Genesis doesn’t require psychological counseling, the contract calls for recipients to pay for up to three sessions for the donor, if the donor chooses. Dover also says, “we ask recipients to get counseling as well, but that’s their responsibility.”

Genesis advocates closed donations but will go with client’s wishes for open ones.

“We try to encourage transferring four embryos,” says Dover. “If you have 10 embryos (eggs that are fertilized, frozen but haven’t started dividing yet), you may get four to six that live through the thawing process. If they’re blastocysts (5-day-old embryos), there’s a darn good chance they’re going to do well and I don’t think any physician would do more than two or three.”

In Fullerton, California, Snowflakes operates on the assumption that this is an adoption. “In our program, we focus on the end result which is the child. That’s the same in all adoptions,” says JoAnn Eiman, a Snowflakes spokesperson.

The Christian faith-based agency requires recipient families undergo a homestudy, a fundamental process in traditional adoption, but controversial in embryo donation for transfer. As Eiman explains it, about 20% of the homestudy is about child abuse and Department of Justice background checks. “The other 80% is preparing the parent for a non-genetically linked child,” she says. The agency does both closed and open donations, depending on the preferences of the parties.

Snowflakes fees to recipients are about $4,000 for the matching, legal contract, shipping, coordination, rematching if required and lifetime support.

Begun in 1997, the first Snowflakes baby was born in 1998. In 1999 there were a couple of matches but no births. But by 2002 there were a total of 18 babies born and this year, Snowflakes expects another 23.

Do donors who’ve gone this far change their minds? “Most don’t but it happens,” said Eiman. “Typically when the donor couple gets a profile on the adoptive family they say ‘Oh my goodness, this is real. They’re going to take them and raise them.’ When they get the packet that’s when it hits them.”

It’s a whole new world, agrees Dover at Genesis. “It remains to be seen whether (donors) really get that they’re going to have children out there. They say, ‘Yes, I understand.’ But what’s going to happen 20 years down the road? I think about that when I’m whiting out the records and I think someday someone might want to look at that.”

When It’s All Too Confusing

Okay. We’re all pretty clear that the “what is to be done” with extra frozen embryos is at best confusing. The American Fertility Association strongly urges that you weigh the following to help ease the strain:

  1. Nobody has control over your embryos but you.
  2. You are not obligated to stick with your first decision or your second or third. The no-turning-back point comes only after you’ve formally and legally relinquished ownership of your embryos.
  3. Know that it is absolutely fine to wait as long as it takes for you to make the decision that feels right for you. No government, social or religious entity should force you into taking an action that, in your gut, you know is a personal mistake. Because you will have to live with this decision forever.
  4. Donating to other couples is a real and generous alternative. The AFA recommends you thoroughly explore the legal, psychological and emotional implications and potential long-term ramifications. You must feel confident that you can deal with the possible outcomes down the road.
  5. Thawing without intent to transfer is a perfectly reasonable option that most couples do choose, finding it provides the unexpected relief of closure. Yes, there may very well be grief and counseling or support that can serve you well.

We at The American Fertility Association will continue to report, write and provide you with as much information about this topic as we can. But, as one of the leading patient advocate groups, The AFA is always available to you, to answer questions, provide support and referrals. Please call our toll-free number (888) 917-3777. It always helps to talk with those who’ve been through it, too. "

Subscribe to my blog here.

Donor Anonymity - What Do You Think?

I read this great blog post by Donor Concierge, and I was impressed by the woman's candor.  I wanted to share this with all of you as Gail has done and get your thoughts on the subject.  As I have also been a donor, I have no problems allowing the children to have contact with me in the future in order to discover who they.   I am not willing to have any relationship beyond that, but I am willing to share with them any information that may help them in their own journey through life.  What do you think?

"Egg Donation: Why I gave up my right to remain anonymous
By Laura Witjens, Chair of the National Gamete Donation Trust, egg donor and mother 08 June 2009

Following a change in the law that came into force on 1 April 2005, British people conceived using donated egg, sperm or embryos can ask for identifying information about the donor when they reach the age of 18. Here Laura Witjens, egg donor and mother of two, writes about why she elected to remove her anonymity and potentially become identifiable to any children born from her donation.

I'll never know what made me watch breakfast television that morning. Being a single working mother with two one-year olds, it was a luxury I could ill afford. But I did, and one of the items changed my life forever. The same day, I contacted a fertility clinic and told them I wanted to be an egg donor.

It was the year 2000 and discussions about the removal of anonymity from egg and sperm donors were only just taking place between patient groups and other fertility organisations. For me, at the time just a willing and partly-informed donor, the notion of being known to any resulting offspring wasn't even a blip on the radar. The counsellor who I saw at the clinic was satisfied I knew what I was doing and, other than the known medical ones, no other long-term implications were discussed. Some months later the deed was done: 13 healthy follicles were harvested and I left the clinic with the feeling I'd done something momentous. Just how momentous, I only found out years later.

Not satisfied with the information available, as well as certain parts of the process, I made another life changing step. I contacted the National Gamete Donation Trust (NGDT) and asked if I could volunteer. I became a Trustee and, motivated by the pending removal of anonymity and differences of opinion with other Trustees, I went on to become the Chair. It's a position I've held for the last six years and in this time I've taken part in many gamete donation discussions.

I firmly believe in leading by example, a philosophy I carry through to my work as a business woman and as Chair of the NGDT. So, with such an emotive subject, how could I lead an organisation without putting my money where my mouth was? If I truly believed in the identity of the donor being disclosed to the donor-conceived person, the legislation at the time of my donation shouldn't have been relevant to me. I knew that re-registering as a known donor with the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) might be futile, since the family created out of my donation would never realise that their donor was willing to be known. Still, it was a matter of principle for me, and one that required substantial soul searching.

I asked myself the many questions that many donors in my position might ask: Can I empathise so much with these people that I'm prepared to open my door, my life, my family at a time that suits them? At the same time, can I be distant enough and accept that whilst I am prepared to make important steps towards that person's wellbeing, I will never find out if indeed they are well? More importantly, how would my children deal with this? They had absolutely no say in my choice to become a donor, but it's known that many donor-conceived people are more curious about their half-siblings than their donor. In other words, it wouldn't be me they were after; they would want to meet my own 'flesh and blood' children.

Through the NGDT I had access to donor-conceived young adults, donor conception parents and various fertility professionals. But not surprisingly the act I was contemplating was, and to a large extent still is, uncharted territory. It seemed no one could help me find the answers I needed. As not just a donor but also heading the NGDT, I did not just want to accept it - I had to wholeheartedly support and embrace it.

My answers came through my children. By then my seven year old daughter and son were developing into individuals with their own quirks, traits and habits. I divorced their father when they were one and remarried when they were four. In other words, I have my own social experiment going on with twins fathered by one man, raised by another.

My children have taken on habits from both men. Unlike donor parents, however, I know where this comes from and can share that with them when appropriate. This may seem rather trivial from the outside, but I know from experience that it does matter to them.

I donated to help other people less fortunate than myself. I went through weeks of unpleasant injections and examinations, believing I was doing the right thing. 'Doing the right thing' has been my drive through all of this: being a donor, leading the NGDT, raising awareness. And now doing the right thing means giving the children I helped to conceive access to information about me.

I have since re-registered and am happy to make myself available to the child born out of my donation. If I can help to give them understanding about themselves I will gladly help. It may seem like a little thing, but I know from experience it could mean the world to them
."

Subscribe to my blog here.

Embryo Mix-Up, Resulting Abortion, and Adequate Justice?

Well, in case that is catching alot of media attention involves a couple who went back to their IVF clinic in the UK to use their last remaining embryos to create a second child.  The reports are as follows:

"A couple who were having IVF treatment when their final embryo was implanted in another woman by mistake said today they might use the compensation they received to try for another child.

The couple, from Bridgend, south Wales, who have a six-year-old son and are identified only as Deborah and Paul, won a legal battle against the IVF Wales clinic, in Cardiff. The woman who received their embryo was told of the mistake shortly after it occurred and decided to terminate the pregnancy.

Deborah and Paul said they would consider trying for another child but it would be two years before they seriously thought about attempting another cycle of IVF treatment because they were not "emotionally ready" after the blunder by the Cardiff and Vale NHS trust.

They turned down an offer of another round of IVF treatment by the trust free of charge after the mix-up and reiterated today that they could never return to the trust because they had lost faith in its staff and procedures.

Nine embryos had been created using IVF in 2000, and Deborah, a 38-year-old hospital worker, subsequently gave birth to a son.

The remaining embryos were stored until 2007, when she and her husband, a 40-year-old print plant manager, decided to try for a second child. One of the embryos had survived and they travelled to the clinic for treatment, only to be told of the mix-up.

Deborah said the couple had been hoping to provide their son with a sister. Describing the moment when they were told about the mistake, she said: "We felt absolutely devastated. Both of us got very tearful.

"We just wanted to get out of there. The actual mention of the termination part of it really upsets us because we tend to think of the embryo as the little boy that we have got because he was from the first batch of embryos."

Paul said: "It took some time afterwards for it to sink in. We decided then we wanted to investigate and we wanted a full report. They were supposed to send us an investigation and they weren't sending anything. That was when we involved a solicitor to look into the case and investigate it."

The causes of the blunder remained secret until lawyers obtained reports into the incident. Documents acquired by their solicitor, Guy Forster, showed that the previous year there had been "near misses" because of problems in monitoring the ownership of embryos."

As you can see the couple is devasted, and the age of the mother, who is now over 40, now works against them retrieving potentially new embryos.  Many are also debating whether the woman who became pregnant should have aborted.  Should she have agreed to be a surrogate mother for this couple?  I don't know - considering she was trying to get pregnant herself.  This is not an ideal solution in any stretch of the imagination.  What are your thoughts?  What should that woman have done?

As for the courts, they awarded the couple $50K according to reports.  Is that enough to compensate this couple?  Is any amount enough to compensate this couple? 

All I can say is that I feel deeply sorry for both couples - no one is a winner in this mess. 

Subscribe to my blog here. 

 

Friday Legal Updates - India Surrogacy, Stem Cell Research, Surrogacy Abroad & More

Hello, and it is Friday again.  TGIF!  I have included a few interesting, yet informative stories that I think you will find to be thought provoking.  I am also including another link to our upcoming European Conference on Third Party Reproduction in Switzerland.  All are welcome!

Press Release Here and Link on Our Web Page 

Salt Lake City, Utah - the fate of Anthony, who is a boy who has been at the center of a legal battle between his biological mother, a traditional surrogate, his father (intended & biological) and his adoptive parents.  It looks like the justice system has worked this one out for the benefit of Anthony.  What do you think?

New York - New York Stem Cell Research Plan is being bashed relentlessly - many cite that women are being exploited by their eggs being used for research.  The claim is that these eggs are also being fertilized and/or being used for cloning.  Yes, egg donation for any purpose is a serious decision that one should only make after careful deliberation; however, I am on the fence on this one.  Anyone care to educate me on this one?

West Virginia - Lesbian moms can keep foster child - ruling confirmed.  The court was originally against the "untraditional" family; however, it looks as if they are allowing them to maintain custody at this point - although they are unable to adopt as a couple (only one can), as same sex couples are not permitted to do that in WV.  Actual opinion here.

Poland - A thirty two year old Polish woman agreed to be a surrogate mother, changed her mind but feared a legal battle and has since relinquished the child.    This is a scary prospect that we all need to think about before going into any of these arrangements, whether you are the surrogate or the parents.  Know the laws before you proceed!

London/India - As another reminder of preparing before moving forward in this area of family building, a couple from London spent a great deal of time in  India in a lengthy legal battle trying to bring their twins home

Another article listed here also provides those interested in surrogacy overseas to be careful, or you may risk losing your children

Subscribe to my blog at here.  

Friday Legal Update - Exclusive: Experts Respond to Octo-Mom's Sperm Donor Confession

Today's Friday Legal Update involves an interesting article regarding the Octo-Mom.  Not only does is discuss my opinion, as well as the opinion of theASRM featuring Sean Tipton, but it truly highlights the need for legal representation and the proper consents that need to be in line between yourself, the donor and your physician.  I think that the story of the Octo-Mom is teaching us again courtesy of RadarOnline....how ironic!  Let me know your thoughts.

"In an exclusive video with RadarOnline.com, Nadya Suleman revealed that she never asked her sperm donor for permission to use their frozen embryos-embryos that would eventually become her octuplets. While all of the Octomom's 14 children share the same bio-dad, Nadya exclusively told RadarOnline.com on Wednesday evening that she "begged" the man to help her conceive her first six kids. When it came to the octuplets, she said, "I went behind his back and used them all. He didn't want me to. I feel so much guilt for that.

"RadarOnline.com asked experts whether Suleman's decision was ethical-or legal. Sean B. Tipton, the director of public relations for the American Society of Reproductive Medicine, explained that men typically sign away most of their rights when they donate sperm. "They almost always relinquish all control over the process," he said. "It's very important that donors understand that they're relinquishing those rights."

Suleman's most recent pregnancy clearly violated other ASRM guidelines, though. The group holds that women under 35 should not be implanted with more than two embryos at once. Nadya was 33 when she was willingly implanted with eight embryos. "We've had guidelines on embryo transfer for years, and we keep ratcheting those down," Tipton said. "Multiple births are dangerous for the mother and the babies."

So could Suleman's donor take legal action against the Octomom? "It's a really sticky situation," attorney Theresa Erickson, founder of the California Family Planning Law Firm, told RadarOnline.com. "It's unlawful for anyone to use sperm, eggs, or embryos for any purpose beyond those on a consent form." If there was no written agreement between Suleman and the donor-or if the agreement included a timetable for the use of the sperm or restricted the freezing of embryos-he could have a case.

"If she asked for more [sperm] later, and another consent form wasn't signed, it's a gray area," Erickson added. "And if she lied to him or manipulated him, that might be a problem." The Octomom has said that her donor "would lose everything" if he came forward. Because of this, Erickson says that we'll likely never know whether she violated the law "unless the medical board investigates or she sues [the doctor] for malpractice. But I doubt that, because she got the eight babies she wanted." (Photo: WENN)"

Subscribe to my blog here

The Egg Donation and Surrogacy Professional Association Meets with Assisted Reproduction Experts

Self-Regulation versus legislation - what is the answer?  What are your thoughts regarding the fertility industry?  Let us know.  

Here is the press release as follows:

"ORLANDO, FL, June 02, 2009 /24-7PressRelease/ -- Recently, in response to the negative press generated by the Octomom and Surrogenesis debacles, the Egg Donation and Surrogacy Professional Association members ("EDSPA") presented the organization's current status and future plans to a multi-disciplined group of internationally recognized assisted reproduction professionals. Among its many offerings, this non-profit organization provides safe practices guidelines to third party reproduction professionals.

The meeting attendees included representatives from the American Society of Reproductive Medicine, RESOLVE, the American Fertility Association, the American Bar Association, Egg Donor Agency owners, Surrogacy Agency owners in addition to attorneys who practices are limited to reproductive law.

The meeting also provided an opportunity for EDSPA to introduce its dispute resolution program for the infertile clients of third party reproduction professionals. This program, believed to be the only one of its kind in the infertility industry, will permit aggrieved clients to resolve disputes with their service providers in a non-litigious environment.

One of the meeting attendees, Maureen McBrien, a notable Boston family law attorney who authored Assisted Reproductive Technology: A Lawyer's Guide to Emerging Law and Science stated that "Right now, there is no regulation ... in general." Attorney McBrien offered her opinion that the best response might be for the industry to police itself. EDSPA could potentially act as a filter for agencies and be a place where intended parents, surrogates and egg donors could find security, she said.

About EDSPA

The Egg Donation and Surrogacy Professional Association accomplishes it's mission by providing a forum for education, communication and advocacy on behalf of patients, physicians, attorneys, agencies and affiliated professionals in the field of Third Party Family Formation."

Subscribe to my blog 

Suit over "Alleged Egg Sharing" Toss Again in Federal Court - ASRM & SART

In an order signed Friday in the District Court for the Northern District of California, Judge Fogel granted the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, but ruled that the plaintiff, the Options National Fertility Registry, could file another amended complaint within 20 days.. 

For more information on this case see Suit Over Alleged Egg-Sharing Tossed Once Again

"Options, a bankrupt international registry of data pertaining to egg donation arrangements, filed the suit in October 2007 on behalf of a group of donors whose eggs the defendants, two organizations that represent doctors and clinics, allegedly gave to unknown and unauthorized recipients via an industrywide practice known as “egg-sharing,” in violation of legally binding contracts.

The suit alleged that from 1992 through 2003, the defendants and Options had written and oral contracts by which the defendants agreed not to transfer, donate, sell, give or otherwise dispose of any eggs or embryos of the donors to anyone other than recipients specifically designated in profile transfer requests signed by doctors.

But from 1992 to the present, the defendants have breached those contracts by engaging in egg-sharing without obtaining the consent of the donors at least two weeks prior to egg retrieval, Options alleged.

Options claimed it did not learn of the practice until January 2005, when a doctor testified that infertility doctors were encouraged by the defendants to participate in egg-sharing, according to court documents.....

The donors also fear that their offspring may have increased risk of unknowingly engaging in incestuous relationships because of the defendants' actions, according to the complaint.

In addition to punitive damages and attorneys' fees and costs, the suit sought to enjoin the defendants from engaging in unauthorized egg-sharing.

After Judge Fogel dismissed the complaint in October, ruling that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction, Options filed an amended complaint in January, alleging the same state law claims for breach of contract, fraud and others, as well as two federal claims for civil Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and antitrust violations.

The amended complaint alleged racketeering because the defendants violated Options' and the donors' rights and property interests, as well as antitrust violations because Options was driven out of business as a result of the defendants' slanderous statements.

In dismissing the amended complaint, Judge Fogel concluded that the Options' claims under the federal statutes were “so devoid of factual support as to border on the frivolous.”

Although Judge Fogel said it was dubious that Options could allege a viable racketeering or antitrust claim in the case, he granted the plaintiff leave to amend the complaint yet again."

Subscribe to my blog at: http://www.surrogacyeggdonorblog.com/subscribe.html

Friday Legal Updates - Embryos, Surrogacy, & Reproductive Tourism Revisited

Happy Friday to one and all!  I am excited about spending a weekend in Los Angeles.  There have been some interesting articles posted over the last week from over the world.  Read and give me your thoughts.  Have a great weekend to all.

Montana - Lesbian Custody Case - Another case of "you are not the parent" explained in detail by Julie Shapiro, who has a great blog with alot of information on many legal issues.  Of course, one of the women did not adopt the children, which would likely not be allowed in Montana, and the other woman wants full custody.  It is another unfortunate case that is even bringing in the Alliance Defense Fund, who opposes gay/lesbian rights.  So, go figure.  It is before the Montana Supreme Court, so we will keep an eye on this one. 

National - Single Embryo Transfer: Why Not Put All Your Eggs in One Basket?  Great article by Dr. Petok via the American Fertility Association.  A great response to the Octomom debacle and the move towards fewer embryos being transferred. 

Australia - Incubated Embryos Destroyed after Sydney IVF Malfunction.   This is a sad situation - I certainly hope that the end result is good for all of these patients. 

Ireland - Irish Couples Face an Uphill Struggle with Surrogacy Laws.  Surrogacy at home in Ireland is almost impossible, even though there are no laws banning such practices.  There is an adoption required, which makes this possibility virtually impossible unless it involves a family member.  And, with changes in the law in the UK in 2005, that country is no longer an option as it was in the past. 

Singapore - Singapore is now allowing reimbursement for altruistic living organ donations.  The regulations and requirements will ultimately fall in the hands of the medical ethics boards in order to determine who is a healthy donor and who is acting altruistically.  The Health Ministry now also has a plan in place as to how this will be done.  Is this a step in the right direction?  What do you think? 

Subscribe to my blog at: http://www.surrogacyeggdonorblog.com/subscribe.html