Proud Parenting

LGBTQ Parents - Lesbian Moms & Gay Dads

Home Insemination: The Ups and Downs.

By

For many people, the lack of ‘creative material’ be it sperm or ovum, can stymie their plans for a family. As appealing as the thought of backless nightgowns, fluorescent lighting and leg stirrups may be, the solution doesn’t have to be found in a fertility clinic. High costs and reduced funding for lesbian couples has made home insemination an increasingly popular option, particularly for those in the LGBT community.
Home insemination using a known donor can be a more rewarding process than a traditional clinic route, possibly resulting in a co-parenting agreement or at least some knowledge of whose sperm or egg you will be using.

Success rates of IVF or IUI within a clinic range from 5-25%. Home insemination has the same success rate and can be more successful due to the relaxed home environment and the freshness of the sperm. Other benefits include cost, privacy, comfort and the final say over who is involved in the process.

Somewhat unfortunately referred to as the Turkey Baster method, home insemination doesn’t have to be an actual turkey baster, (eye watering thought) but rather, a needleless syringe or soft-cup to hold the sperm around the cervix.

Home insemination does carry some risks though, both to your health and your legal rights, so it’s really important to be sure that it suits you and your future family.

When home insemination could be considered;
• When you are planning to co-parent with another single or couple, whom you know well, and a legal co-parenting agreement is in place.
• When you are in a civil partnership and you are planning to use a known donor with a legal sperm donor agreement in place.
• When the donor has had all their health screening checks, has no history of genetic disease in their family and has practiced safe sex for the last 6 months.

As importantly, when it should not be considered;
• When you are a single woman not planning to co-parent as the donor will always be the legal father in the eyes of the law.
• When you are a lesbian couple, but not in a civil partnership and not wishing to co-parent. Again, the donor will be the legal father in the eyes of the law.
• When you do not know your donor or co-parent well enough.
• When your donor has not given evidence of full health screening tests
• When your donor may be at risk of infection, (not practising safe sex, donating to other women by natural insemination, has ever been an intravenous drug user)

If you do find the right donor or co-parent, you may wish to start trying for a child right away. Before this, your donor must visit their doctor or local GUM clinic to get a complete series of infection screening, to include HIV, Hepatitis B & C, Chlamydia, CMV, Syphilis, Gonorrhoea and Genital herpes. (It is important to be aware that many of these tests will not show as positive if they have caught an infection within the last 28 days)

The woman should also consider getting tested for infections and get a vaginal swab taken to rule out any possible vaginosis or thrush. Bacterial vaginosis is present in as many as 20% of lesbians. It is not a sexually acquired infection, rather an imbalance in the natural bacteria. Bacterial vaginosis has been linked with reduced conception and higher risk of early miscarriage. There is now a new product, Zestica Conception Kit which prepares your vaginal flora to reduce the chance of infection.

The next important thing is to get legal advice and a properly drawn up legal donor or co-parenting agreement. This may be an extra expense, but will help prevent any potential problems, further down the line.

The Ins and Outs
Basically, all you need is a container of your chosen sperm and a syringe. However, there are ways to maximise your chances of success.
1) Choose latex free syringes – latex can damage sperm
2) Use a speculum and extender tip with the syringe. This ensures that the sperm reach the cervix and helps them on their journey.
3) Use a sperm friendly lubricant – the wrong lubricant can damage sperm, whereas a sperm friendly lubricant can help their motility.
4) Have an orgasm following insertion of the sperm, this causes the cervix to dip down into the sperm and again helps them on their journey.
5) Tilt and raise your pelvis with cushions for 30 minutes after insemination.
6) Use a soft-cup following insertion of the sperm (this is placed around the cervix and can be worn for up to 12 hours to keep them in their place)

To read more go to http://bit.ly/mXVIH5

Easter fertility and pregnancy tips

By

We hope that the Easter bunny came to your home today and we wish all of you who are trying for your own little chick much luck and happiness on your journey.

Getting pregnant may be easy for some although for others it may mean a little planning and a little lifestyle change. If you’re planning to get pregnant, or you have been trying to get pregnant for some time now and you are not having any success, you may possibly need some tips about fertility and pregnancy.

If you have been trying and planning to get pregnant, you’ll need to prepare your body and understand your fertility to help you facilitate the process. One important thing to keep in mind when planning to get pregnant is to understand when you ovulate or when you’re most fertile – as this signifies your chances of getting pregnant easily.

For tips and techniques to get pregnant easily, you might find these helpful.

1) Know when to conceive: If you have a regular 28-day menstrual cycle, count fourteen days after your first day of menstruation and mark that as your fertile period. If you want to increase your chances of getting pregnant, make sure you inseminate on those fertile times. Ovulation tests will help to detect the best days around your ‘fertile window’.

2) Lie still: One additional helpful detail around this issue. – Spend a few minutes lying after insemination or support your buttocks with a pillow to help give time for the sperm to swim to its destination.

3) Check if you’re not killing the sperm: Some artificial lubricants, vaginal sprays and douches may alter the pH level in the vagina that may lead to infection or may wash the mucus that helps transport the sperm, or may kill the sperm before even reaching its destination. Saliva as well can be harmful for the sperm, so make a healthy environment for the sperm as possible if you’re planning to get pregnant.

To read more go to http://bit.ly/fbeTBf

Sperm donors online: Are there emotional and physical risks?

By

The following recent article by the Daily Mail highlights the risks both physically and emotionally of sleeping with a sperm donor met online. As a single woman any donor would be classed as the child’s legal father and could be held financially responsible. For this reason many donors may try to conceal their true identity, which adds a greater risk for the recipient, of not having adequate identification for CRB checks and health screening tests. Not to mention the importance of any child not being able to trace their biological routes when they are older.

Erika from Pride Angel states ‘ There are many advantages for personally meeting a sperm donor and having them involved in their child’s life’ ‘Making sure that both parties have the same views regarding their parenting and level of involvement is imperative to any successful arrangement’

‘It is also important to consider the risks, getting legal advice and full health screening tests before attempting to conceive’ ‘Using a regulated clinic is the only real way of being certain about any health risks and gaining fertility treatment through a clinic also clarifies the legal position for both the donor and the recipient’ .

For these reasons Pride Angel unlike many other websites, has strict terms and conditions regarding donors not donating by natural insemination, no payments being offered and anonymous donation is strongly discouraged. Profiles are monitored constantly and users are able to ‘Report’ any concerns they have regarding other members.

Article: Frances Benning, 29 has chosen to conceive with a sperm donor. She has scheduled the event meticulously; planned every detail with military precision — for her sole purpose is to become pregnant. But the man she has chosen to be the father of her baby is neither her husband, nor her partner nor, even, a long-term friend. In fact, he is Toby, a sperm donor she met for the first time just a few hours ago.

Toby, 30, who is affluent and handsome with a glamorous job in the film industry, and Frances — attractive, articulate and privately-educated — were introduced via a website that matches potential sperm donors with would-be mothers. After she singled him out as a prospective father, they corresponded before arranging to meet.

No money would change hands but, at the end of their brief encounter, Frances fervently hoped, Toby would have bestowed on her the priceless gift of life.

After that, she planned to embark on life as a single mum. She figured she could manage perfectly alone: she is resourceful, financially secure and owns her own house outright. But as is often the case with even the best-laid schemes, Frances’ went awry. For a start, she failed to factor emotions into her plan, and had not reckoned on the impact of seeing the father of her future child face-to-face.

‘When I first met Toby I thought, “Wow!”,’ she recalls. ‘He is 6ft 5in, dark-haired and blue-eyed with lovely broad muscular shoulders. He looked even better than he did in his photos. Under different circumstances Frances, a legal secretary, and Toby, whose job as a researcher takes him round the world, could have been made for each other.

To read more go to http://bit.ly/fGXZOg

The Importance of Legal Representation – UK Surrogate Ruling Allows Surrogate to Keep Custody

By

Happy Friday! I know that I keep pushing home the idea of making certain that you have an experienced ART attorney helping you when you start your journey.

“A surrogate mother who changed her mind about handing over her baby has been allowed to keep the child.

A judge ruled the mother was better able to meet the child’s needs and said the risks of a surrogacy agreement were “considerable”.

The mother had met a couple over the internet and entered into a surrogacy agreement, an earlier court hearing in Birmingham had been told.

She later changed her mind and refused to hand over the baby when it was born.

‘Relations deteriorated’

The court had heard that the couple, known as Mr and Mrs W, were married in 2005 but their attempts to have a baby resulted in a series of miscarriages.

They met the mother, who has two older children, in 2009 and they agreed she would be inseminated with Mr W’s sperm.

She became pregnant but at some point during the pregnancy relations between the two parties deteriorated, the court heard.

The child, known as T, was born on 16 July, 2010.

Mrs W went to the hospital but said she was made to feel unwelcome by the mother’s friends and family.

Mr W sought legal moves a week later and a judge appointed another woman as the child’s guardian.

Explaining his reasons Mr Justice Baker said at the date of the hearing, T had been five months old.

“The evidence from the guardian is that she is thriving in her mother’s care,” he said.

He also said he did not believe that Mr and Mrs W and the mother had told him the whole truth about a number of matters.

He raised concerns about the mother’s behaviour too, saying that at one point she had adopted a false persona in order to elicit information about Mr and Mrs W.

However, he said he did not believe she had deliberately set out to deceive the couple.

‘Lack of insight’
He also raised concerns about Mr and Mrs W in relation to their involvement with another woman who was known to police and social services.

He said the couple had also shown a “startling lack of insight” as to the child’s needs and any difficulties that might arise if she were moved to their care after the hearing.

The judge has ordered a review hearing for next month to see how matters are progressing.

He also said there would “interim visiting contact” between the father and the child until the hearing.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-12257448

Jennifer Aniston says ‘women no longer need a man in order to have a child.’

By

In her latest film, The Switch, the 41-year-old actress plays a single woman who uses a sperm donor to get pregnant.
“Women are realising it more and more – knowing that they don’t have to settle with a man just to have that child,” Aniston said.

“Times have changed and what is amazing is that we do have so many options these days, as opposed to our parents’ days when you can’t have children because you have waited too long.

“The point of the movie is: what is it that defines a family? It isn’t necessarily the traditional mother, father, two children and a dog named Spot.

“Love is love and family is what is around you and who is in your immediate sphere. That is what I love about this movie. It is saying it is not the traditional sort of stereotype of what we have been taught as a society of what family is.”

To read more go to

Jennifer Aniston: searches for a sperm donor in her new movie ‘The Switch’

By

Jennifer Aniston plays a wannabe mother who undergoes artificial insemination, using what she believes is the perfect donor’s sperm, to get pregnant.
And when it comes to off screen it seems Aniston would allow life to imitate art, insisting that if she ever went that route she too would definitely ‘wanna know the guy’.

Aniston revealed her preference during an appearance on Jay Leno’s Tonight Show, in Los Angeles.

In The Switch, Aniston plays singleton Kassie who is desperate to have a baby. Ignoring the objections of her best friend, Wally (played by Jason Bateman) she decides to go it alone.

Kassie chooses a handsome and charming donor but before she can complete the act of insemination, unbeknown to her, a drunk Wally swaps the sperm for his own.

The switch isn’t discovered until seven years later when he finally meets her precocious, though slightly neurotic, son.

Aniston has talked about her desire to be a mother one day, telling Entertainment Weekly ‘I’m on the verge of it in some way…it’s something I long for.’

To read more go to http://bit.ly/crxjZN

“Fertility’s New Legal Front” – Survivor Benefits & Children Conceived After Death

By

Interesting article from the Wall Street Journal that addresses the disparity in the law state by state for Social Security Survivor Benefits –

By ASHBY JONES:
Advances in reproductive technology that were the stuff of science fiction just a few decades ago are wreaking havoc on a corner of the Social Security system—survivor benefits for some children whose parents have died.

Every year, more babies are born stemming from sperm or embryos that have been stored for months or years. In some cases, one parent has already died, usually the father.

Although the federal government generally must pay monthly benefits to children when parents die, the law is murky on whether it has to do the same for a child conceived after a parent’s death. Sometimes, the Social Security Administration pays, sometimes it doesn’t. So far, the decision has largely depended on the laws in the state in which the deceased parent lived.

“We’re in a brave new world here.…Technology has gone far beyond where the law ever dreamed it would,” said Sonny Miller, a lawyer in Minnesota and a member of the legislative committee of the Minnesota bar association’s probate and trust law section.

State laws on posthumous birth—or the birth of a child after the death of a parent—vary widely. Eleven states explicitly allow recognition of a parent-child relationship that begins with posthumous conception. The laws of most states, however, define the parent-child relationship more traditionally. For the relationship to exist, a parent must be alive at the time of conception.

Ambiguities in the law surrounding the legal rights of a child born posthumously are increasingly leading to lawsuits. In recent years, courts in Massachusetts, New Jersey, Arizona and Iowa have ruled that such children are entitled to Social Security benefits. Courts in Florida, New Hampshire and Arkansas have ruled that benefits should not be paid.

One of the latest cases has made it to Utah’s Supreme Court. At the center of the case is a 38-year-old widow, Gayle Burns, in Murray, Utah. In December 2003, she gave birth to a son, Ian, using sperm that her husband, Michael, had deposited in a sperm bank the year prior to his death. Michael died in 2001 of complications from non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

Ian received a total of about $35,000 in Social Security survivor benefits. Last August, however, the agency decided that Ms. Burns had failed to show Ian was her dead husband’s child, as defined under the federal Social Security Act. In response to the agency’s demands to return the money, Ms. Burns was forced to file for personal bankruptcy.

A couple of months later, she sued the agency, and this June, the case ended up in the state’s Supreme Court. A date hasn’t been set for a hearing.

“The rationale [the administration] gives is that Michael is not Ian’s father,” said Ms. Burns, who hasn’t remarried and works as an administrative assistant at a commercial real-estate firm in Salt Lake City. “I’ll keep fighting that until the courts recognize it.”

The Social Security Administration said it was simply following the law. The Social Security Act requires the federal government to look to state law to determine whether a parent-child relationship exists. “The appropriate state’s…law must be considered,” said Michael Baksa, a spokesman for the administration’s regional office in Denver.

Mr. Miller, the Minnesota lawyer, said he understood the agency’s reluctance to pay out benefits to posthumously conceived children. Typically, he said, the benefits are intended to help parents who have experienced an unexpected tragedy and loss of income. “It’s not meant as something you expect to get when you make the decision to have a child,” he said.

He said the Minnesota legislature recently decided not to change the state’s law to account for posthumous conception. Otherwise, he said, the state would have had to amend much of its law concerning inheritance.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704905004575405470172232394.html

Dating site offering ‘beautiful baby’ virtual egg and sperm bank

By

Dating site offering ‘beautiful baby’ virtual egg and sperm bank

A controversial dating website, with a strict ban on ugly and fat people, has launched what it’s calling a ‘beautiful baby service’, a virtual egg and sperm bank for people who want to have attractive babies.
This same website kicked out 5,000 users in January because other members signaled that they became too chubby celebrating Christmas and the New Year.

Critics are questioning the ethics of the site but those running it are making no apologies.

The site says its “beautiful baby service” is open to everyone. The founder said ‘even ‘ugly people’ would like to bring good looking children into the world. But one British watchdog group says cherry picking pretty people as parents, is just wrong.

“It’s a symptom of a very dangerous tendency in our society that says we can take control of everything to do with reproduction and have it exactly the way we want it,” said Dr. David King from Human Genetics Alert.

While there is a need for providing a service for single, gay, lesbian and infertile couples to have children, this website seems to be heading towards eugenics and the creation of designer babies, which is very concerning.

Pride Angel the leading website connection service for gay, lesbian, single and infertile couples wishing to become parents said ‘Websites seem to be offering sperm donors services like dating agencies with little thought to the serious consequences of not being aware of all the important factors which need careful consideration, when undertaking donor conception, such as sexually transmitted disease screening, the legal rights of the donor or co-parent and ultimately the right of the child to have information about their donor’.

To read more go to http://bit.ly/aQwLHT

Assisted Reproduction and its effects on the Babys Outcome

By

Assisted Reproduction Has NO effect on Birthing Process or the Babys Outcome

Whether a women gets pregnant the “traditional” way or by assisted reproduction has no effect on the birthing process itself or the baby, researchers at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) have found.
Gynaecologist and medical researcher Liv Bente Romundstad and colleagues from NTNU and St Olav’s University Hospital in Trondheim looked at the pregnancies of more than 1.2 million Norwegian women whose births were listed in the Medical Birth Registry of Norway between 1984 and 2006. Of these, 8229 were pregnancies that resulted from assisted reproduction technology.

In a series of articles published in The Lancet and Human Reproduction, the researchers reported finding no difference between infants of women who had conceived spontaneously and after assisted fertilization in birth weight, gestational age, risks of being small for gestational age, and preterm delivery. Researchers found a higher risk of breech births in pregnancies from assisted fertilization, but their findings suggest the difference is due not to the technology itself, but to the gestational age of the baby and the number of previous deliveries that the mother had had.

Breech births
Romundstad found that five percent of the children from assisted reproduction are born in a breech presentation, compared with three percent of the average. She says this has a straightforward explanation: Mothers who have children by assisted reproduction, are in fact slightly older than average, tend to have shorter pregnancies, and fewer previous births.

When Romundstad adjusted for these differences, she found out that the difference in the proportion of breech births disappeared completely.

“We also believe that some of the frequency of breech births can be explained by the fact that children often are in the breech position early in the pregnancy,” she said. “The children turned several times during the pregnancy, and assumed the head-down position when the normal gestation period ended.”

“If a child is born before the end of the gestation period, it is not clear that the child has time to assume the head-down position,” Romundstad says.

Go to http://bit.ly/ddN0A9

www.prideangel.com

Natural Insemination – ‘a risky option’

By

Risks of choosing natural insemination as a method of conceiving

For many women the overwhelming desire to have a child means they will go to great lengths to achieve their dream of becoming a mum. Those not wishing to go down the fertility clinic route are left with two main options artificial insemination or natural insemination. Pride Angel investigates why the risks of choosing natural insemination as an option is extremely concerning. Surely the majority of lesbian women would not wish to choose natural insemination ‘sexual intercourse’ with a man, however a minority of donors do offer natural insemination to lesbian couples and single women promoting that it is the most effective and ‘natural’ way of conception.

‘Obvious risks not only include the physical safety of having ‘sex’ with an unknown person, but the far greater chance of getting a sexually transmitted infection such as HIV. Donors may proclaim their clean bill of health by showing a week old test result, however many infections do not show up in blood tests until 4-6 weeks after catching the infection. Therefore health test results cannot be relied upon from donors who offer natural insemination ‘unprotected sex’ in the same way that any promiscuous man would be a higher risk.’said Erika from Pride Angel.

‘ Many infections are spread by blood or physical contact, for example hepatitis C is spread by contact with blood, herpes (genital warts ) is spread by physical skin to skin contact. Therefore the act of sexual intercourse itself puts women at more risk of acquiring infections than artificial insemination’ stated founders of Pride Angel.

Pride Angel recommends recipients get to know their sperm donors, ensuring their personal safety, checking their identity and health screening tests thoroughly.

http://blogs.prideangel.com/post/2010/02/Natural-insemination—a-risky-option.aspx

www.prideangel.com