Proud Parenting

LGBTQ Parents - Lesbian Moms & Gay Dads

Sperm donor to pay child support after donating by natural insemination

By

A UK man who donated sperm to a married woman he met via a sperm donor website has been ordered to pay child support. The pair met via a website advertising sperm donors and started trying to conceive artificially, before they began an affair. The High Court heard evidence from both sides and rejected the man’s evidence that the couple only started having sex after the child was conceived, finding that the child was conceived through ‘natural insemination’ – in other words sexual intercourse – rather than through artificial insemination.
This meant that the donor was not legally a sperm donor, and so like any other biological father was liable to pay child support. In a rare move for a children case, he was also ordered to pay all the legal costs of the woman’s husband and three quarter’s of the woman’s legal costs, since the court decided he had not told the truth.

What makes a legal sperm donor?

Men who agree to donate their sperm are not protected from financial responsibilities just because they agree this with the birth mother or describe themselves as a donor. They are only sheltered from financial claims if they:

1) donate via a UK licensed clinic, or

2) donate by artificial insemination to a married or civilly partnered couple, with the consent of both partners.

In this case, the birth mother was married. Had the court decided that conception took place by artificial insemination, it would next have had to determine whether the birth mother’s husband consented (and if so he, rather than the sperm donor, would have been the child’s legal father). However, given that conception occurred through intercourse, there was no need to go to the next step, and the sperm donor was financially responsible.

Lessons for other sperm donors

The case shows the risks of conceiving through donation outside the framework of regulated treatment at clinics. It’s been an expensive lesson for the donor in this case. Other men considering donating via websites should be clear about how the law works, and whether their plans might put them on the hook financially. If they donate via ‘NI’ they can forget any legal protection whatsoever.

There is more information about known sperm donation on our website. You can read the judgment in this case in full here.

Article: 1st August 2013 www.nataliegambleassociates.co.uk

Anonymous donor conceived want the right to know their biological parents

By

It is undeniable that we humans have an innate desire to know from whom we came. Many people who are adopted or have only one parent will tell you that they feel they are missing a piece of a puzzle.
Genealogy websites like Ancestry.com exist because of our fascination with our genetic ancestors. Every time I see an ad for Ancestry.com, a place where you “Find your ancestors’ stories” and “Discover yours,” I feel that tug to find out more about my grandparents and great-grandparents. My daughter’s junior year project for high school was a presentation and paper on the immigration of both sides of her family to America.

Now imagine if you were purposely denied one half of your story by a powerful industry that runs on anonymity. And what if when you pointed out the intentional injustice, you were told that you should shut-up and simply be grateful for your life.

This is the experience for many a child conceived from anonymous donor gametes. The following is a excerpt from testimony that Alana S. Newman, founder of AnonymousUs.org, gave to the California Assembly Committee on Health regarding AB460, a bill in the California legislature that would require insurers to offer coverage for infertility treatments regardless of the relationship.

Alana is bravely standing up for the rights of those intentionally denied what she believes is a fundamental right: the right to a relationship with one’s biological parents. She writes:

The facts of my conception are that my father was paid to abandon me. There is no dignity in that. I suffered from debilitating identity issues, mistrust of the opposite sex, hatred and condemnation of the opposite sex, feelings of objectification – like I only exist as a play – toy for others, and feeling like a science experiment.

If people can take away something so precious as a mother or father and make us feel like we should be grateful for the loss, what else can people take away from us? How do you expect the next generation to fight for things like freedom, democracy, clean air, clean water, when something as precious and basic as your mother or father is stolen from you? Removed by the state… Removed by a fertility industry that forces you into existence and then doesn’t return your calls when you grow up and start banging on their doors asking for records… Removed by a commissioning parent, often your other biological parent who vowed to protect and provide for you, but only on the contingency that you show gratitude for your life and don’t ask questions about the other missing parent….

One of the United State’s most famous civil rights leaders was Malcolm X. The “X” he used to replace his last name was a direct criticism of slave – owners removing slaves from their spouses, parents and children, and being disconnected from their ancestry and heritage. “Who do you think you are” is a popular TV show where celebrities have their genealogy investigated. Rosie O’Donnell herself expressed a craving to “discover her family as fully fleshed out people and learn about their journeys”. The sheer existence of a term and concept like genealogy demonstrates that it is unfair to minimize and marginalize donor – conceived people’s curiosities about our genetic kin, and dismiss our desire for connection…..

Having a bloated industry where medical and legal professionals profit from separating children from their biological parents is problematic.

Very few people like to hear that their choices have devastating consequences for others. If there is a place where voices like Alana’s need to be heard, it is the fertility machine. Both infertile couples and the fertility industry must hear what she is saying. The desire for a child does not trump the right of a child to know his or her biological parents.

Article: 14th June 2013 www.lifenews.com

Read more about known sperm donation at www.prideangel.com

Sperm donation in the US – not a DIY project!

By

Several months ago I consulted with a woman and her same-sex partner. I’ll refer to them as “Sue” and “Sally.” They had a 3-year-old son who was conceived using sperm donated directly to the couple by a close friend named “Stan.” Donation and conception took place under friendly circumstances at the women’s home. Stan did his part in the privacy of their bathroom, and they promptly used his sperm to create a baby. Voilà, the conception of “Baby X” was confirmed in a matter of weeks.
I asked Sue and Sally why they never hired lawyers, and why they asked Stan to donate his sperm in their home. The answer was the same I hear every time I ask this question: They had wanted to keep the relationship and the process “natural” and “informal” so as not to scare Stan.

Fast-forwarding three years to the reason Sue and Sally were in my office, it turns out they were not enjoying the friendship they once had with Stan. Instead, they were exchanging heated emails and text messages with him. Stan had fallen in love with Baby X, and Sue and Sally had become uncomfortable with Stan’s expectations regarding his role and time spent with the child. Stan had mentioned possible legal action to obtain parental rights.

Sue and Sally wanted to know if Stan could file for legal rights and, heaven forbid, obtain a formal custody order. Sue was angry with Sally for refusing to hire an attorney or use a physician for the sperm donation in the first place. Sally’s mind was blown that Stan could potentially have legal rights to her child. The thought had never crossed her mind. We had a mess on our hands.

Our nation presents a very complicated state-by-state legal quilt on donor insemination. But one thing is consistent throughout the country: No matter where you live, the informal, friendly, at-home donation method is a bad idea. The casual use of a friend’s sperm almost always leads to unwanted legal consequences.

New parents often tell me they want to avoid formality because it feels wrong — somehow it defeats the entire purpose of becoming parents. Why hire physicians and attorneys for something that should be natural and organic? The answer is simple: Becoming a parent is one of the most important things you will do in this lifetime, and it needs to be done right.

Choosing to use a friend as your sperm donor is a big decision. Do not shy away from formality and transparency! You likely chose your donor for more than his pretty face — you probably share a deep emotional connection with him. This makes transparency and formality that much more important. A contract ensures that you, your partner, and your sperm donor have a complete meeting of the minds regarding expectations, roles, legal rights, etc. The same holds true for involving a physician; it not only ensures medical safety but protects your donor legally.

If you are using a known donor whom you do not want to have parental rights, the safe approach is to formalize — anything less is asking for trouble. This is a two-step process: First, hire an attorney to explain the process and draft the necessary contracts for you. Second, have the donor provide his sperm through a licensed physician. The clarity and transparency that comes with the formal approach is not only shrewd planning; it’s respectful to the donor.

Article: 10th June 2013 www.huffingtonpost.com

Read more about known sperm donation and home insemination at www.prideangel.com

Considering co-parenting or using a known donor? How counsellors may hep

By

There are many issues to consider for parents considering conceiving with a known donor or co-parent. With a minefield of information to navigate, parents can be left asking: what do we need to know? How do we set things up? How do we avoid problems in the future?
Where conception takes place at a fertility clinic, counsellors can play a key role in answering these questions. In the light of the recent landmark decision on known sperm donation, BICA – the association for UK fertility counsellors – asked NatalieGambleAssociates (NGA) to give some guidance on what fertility counsellors need to know about the law on known donation, to help them do their job effectively.

Nicola Scott’s recent article in the BICA journal gives an overview of UK law and the implications of the case, and explains how early intervention by fertility counsellors can shape known donor arrangements positively by encouraging parents and donors to iron out potential issues and mismatched expectations at an early stage. You can read the full article here

NatalieGambleAssociates advise parents on a wide spectrum of arrangements by clarifying not only the legal issues but also the practical aspects which are all too often overshadowed. Please see our donor conception pages for more information, or contact us to discuss your arrangement and options here

Article: www.nataliegambleassiciates.co.uk

Read more about co-parenting and finding a known donor at www.prideangel.com

TV company wants to hear from sperm donors and recipients, can you help?

By

Seneca Productions is a television production company based in London, UK. We specialise in high-end documentaries, the most recent of which was All In The Best Possible Taste with Grayson Perry.
We’re developing an observational documentary on private sperm donation, in which we’ll follow donors and recipients through their experiences, while getting insight into the community and its motivations.

We want to speak to as many British donors and recipients as possible. We’d like to have a telephone conversation with those who reach out to us, rather than send out a standard questionnaire.

Individuals can be as open or anonymous as they like during this informal chat. Do you have something to say about sperm donation? Do you have an interesting story to tell? If so, get in touch.

We want to tell people’s story as it is. If anyone wishes to know more about the type of programmes we make please take a look at our recent Channel 4 documentary, ‘All in the best possible taste with Grayson Perry’
“A fabulous work of television.” (The Guardian)
“A terrific series.” ***** (The Times).
Available on 4oD.

You can contact Pride Angel for more information, or email Marcus direct – marcusplowright@senecaproductions.com or give Marcus a call on +44 (0)20 7324 6079. Many thanks for all your help.

Article: 22nd February 2012 Seneca Productions

Landmark High Court ruling on sperm donation and same sex parenting

By

The High Court has today made a landmark ruling, allowing two civilly partnered sperm donors the right to ask for contact with their biological children (against the wishes of the children’s respective lesbian mothers), but also warning that it will consider the need to protect the lesbian families carefully before a final decision is made. NGA is representing the mothers in the case of Re Z, one of the two connected cases and the one which brought the novel legal issues to the attention of the court.
The ruling has significant implications for same sex parents and families created through donor conception. It is the first case to test rights for same sex parents introduced by Parliament in 2008, which give lesbian mothers the same legal protection following sperm donation as opposite sex parents. Under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008, the mothers in this case, as civil partners, are the legal parents of their children. The biological fathers, like sperm donors through clinics, are expressly excluded from being treated as the legal fathers ‘for any purpose’. Relationships broke down after the men each sought more involvement than the mothers agreed. They applied to court, and the court has now ruled that they can have their cases heard.

The court’s decision opens the door to legal claims from sperm donors who want involvement but have no legal parental status. But the judgment also makes it clear that every case will be considered carefully. Donors will not simply be treated as fathers, and protecting the primary family’s autonomy is also a ‘material consideration’.

Donors will only be able to seek redress on the basis of the the particular facts, where this is justified. In Re G and Re Z, the fact that the donors had had early contact with the children was what persuaded the court that they should at least be allowed to have their cases heard. However, although the court has given the donors ‘leave’ to apply, it does not necessarily follow that they will actually be given any rights of contact, and the court has warned that the underlying legal framework will be a significant consideration, and that any expectation of very significant contact is likely to be ‘wholly unrealistic’.

Mr Justice Baker suggested that there was no principle being created of automatic rights for donors to lesbian couples: “I endorse the submissions that the policy underpinning these reforms is an acknowledgement that alternative family forms without fathers are sufficient to meet a child’s need… Thousands of children in this country are being brought up happily and successfully by same-sex couples.”

Going forward, there are some significant lessons for same sex parents (and anyone conceiving through known donation):

Lesbian mothers need to understand that being named on the birth certificate does not give absolute protection. Conceiving with a known donor will always carry some level of risk if things don’t work out as intended, so mothers should be very careful about giving any level of contact unless they are absolutely sure.

Gay fathers who act as known donors need to understand that their legal position may be more fragile and uncertain than they think. Men who want to be fully involved fathers will not have any automatic rights if there is a dispute.

Everyone going into known donation or co-parenting arrangements should be crystal clear about their expectations from the outset. Setting the strongest possible foundations at the start is the best way of avoiding later problems. One way to do that is to put an agreement in place, but the real key is good communication – an agreement is a means to that rather than an end in itself. There is more from our blog on How to Avoid a Known Donor Dispute.

At NGA, we provide leading specialist advice to parents conceiving through known donation, including same sex parents, both male and female, and leading representation to those in disputes. We have worked at the cutting edge of the law, pushing boundaries, for many years, and were instrumental in helping create the rights for same sex parents in the HFE Act 2008. There is more information on our website about known donor disputes and about planning known donation for mothers and for fathers. You can also follow us on Twitter for the latest updates on our work and campaigns.

Article: 1st February 2013 www.nataliegambleassociates.co.uk

Known sperm donors discussed on Woman’s hour

By

Natalie was interviewed on BBC Radio 4 Woman’s Hour on Thursday on the topic of private sperm donation. The programme feature NGA client Mark Langridge (the donor who has been pursued for child support by the CSA twelve years after donating his sperm to a lesbian couple) and Laura Witjens, Chief Executive of the National Gamete Donation Trust, with Jenni Murray asking ‘what makes a father’?
You can listen to Natalie on Woman’s Hour here.

At NGA, we advise many prospective parents (and donors) considering a known donation arrangement, helping them to set things up with the strongest foundations.

We sadly also help people whose known donation arrangements have broken down, both representing donors pursued for child support and lesbian and solo parents whose donors seek more involvement than they want.

You can find out more about known donation and about known donor disputes.

Article: 20th November 2012 www.nataliegambleassociates.co.uk

Canadian sperm donor refused access to 18 month toddler until trial

By

The potential risk of introducing a Northern Ontario toddler to his genetic father at this point in his life is too major to be ignored, a judge has ruled in turning down a sperm donor’s bid for interim access to the boy, now being raised by his biological mother and her lesbian partner. The decision marks the first round in a key test case of the uncertain law around exchanges of human sperm and egg, as increasing numbers of Canadian children are born by “assisted” reproduction.
A full trial is scheduled for this October to consider the man’s demand for paternity rights – and add some clarity to the tangled issue – but Rene deBlois had requested access to the boy pending the final wrap-up of the case. The two women had argued that Tyler Lavigne, who has never met Mr. deBlois, might become confused and insecure if the 22-month-old encountered the donor now, noted Justice Norman Karam of the Ontario Superior Court in Cochrane, Ont.

“Despite the child’s young age, it is impossible to know what disclosure of [Mr. deBlois’s] status as his parent might mean,” said the judge. “All circumstances considered, the risk of there being an adverse effect to the child is too great to ignore.” Justice Karam said he considered imposing limitations on the access to deal with those concerns, but decided the restrictions would be virtually impossible to enforce. He said he also found “very convincing” the couple’s argument that by allowing access to the child now, he could inadvertently affect the outcome of the trial, expected to be closely watched by legal analysts, parent groups and others.

Selena Kazimierski and Nicole Lavigne say the donor – a former high-school acquaintance of Ms. Lavigne – signed an agreement that he would never contact the baby born in October, 2010, with the help of his artificially inseminated sperm. They fear the family life they have built for their son would be unduly disrupted if he that changed. The donor says he no longer honours the deal, partly because Ms. Lavigne failed to follow through on her verbal commitment to have a baby for him, too.

It is common sense to delay creating a relationship between a child and a stranger unless there is a guarantee that the relationship will continue Legal experts say the case offers up a relatively straightforward set of facts, allowing the court to directly tackle a question overhanging many such arrangements.

Growing numbers of children are being born in Canada as a result of in-vitro fertilization and other forms of assisted reproduction, often to same-sex couples. When donations are obtained anonymously from sperm banks, and in the few provinces with relevant laws, parenthood is generally uncontested.

In situations where couples and single people make arrangements with sperm donors they know, however – especially in provinces that lack such legislation – the rights of the various parties remain largely unresolved. A smattering of mostly lower-court rulings have addressed the question, but most of the cases have had complicating factors, such as a past relationship between the donor and recipient.

Lucia Mendonca, Mr. deBlois’s lawyer, could not be reached for comment Wednesday. Ms. Lavigne voiced relief at the ruling on interim access, saying it would have been too disruptive for everyone to allow the genetic father and son to meet, when the trial might rule Mr. deBlois has no paternity rights. “It would …. just cause pain on all sides,” she said. “It would be hard on him, if he got attached, and now ‘You’re never going to see him again.’ ”

The decision correctly analyzed the law – and applied pure common sense to the situation, said Michelle Flowerday, the Toronto-based fertility and family-law lawyer representing the couple. “It is common sense to delay creating a relationship between a child and a stranger unless there is a guarantee that the relationship will continue,” she said. “There is no guarantee here. We may well succeed at trial.”

The judge also said that he would not consider a legal motion by the couple to reverse an earlier decision, made when the women were represented by a different lawyer, to essentially void the sperm-donation contract. It is expected that issue will be considered at the trial, due to start Oct. 21. Justice Karam also rejected a request by Mr. deBlois for an investigation by Ontario’s Office of the Children’s Lawyer – which represents the interests of children in custody disputes – saying such a probe would be “of little value.”

Article: 8th August 2012 www.nationalpost.com

The Times are looking to speak with lesbian and gay co-parenting families

By

The Times Weekend section are doing a piece on the Alternative Families Show, taking place Saturday 23rd October 2010 – 10am to 5pm GRAND CONNAUGHT ROOMS, COVENT GARDEN, LONDON
The Times are looking for a compelling case study to lead the piece, of people who have successfully started a family through co-parenting.

Would any of our members be interested in a photo shoot and an interview with them, talking about your experience of finding someone to start a family with, who you are not in a relationship with?

Any interested members would need to be photographed, but this could be done in an anonymous way if necessary. If both co-parents are willing to speak that would also be fantastic. The Times are interested in Lesbian couples who have used a known sperm donor or gay and lesbian singles or couples who have made co-parenting arrangements.

The piece would be sensitive and non-sensationalist, highlighting the growing number of people who realise their dream of starting a family using alternative means.

The Times would like to speak with anyone interested, as soon as possible.
Please contact Pride Angel for further information contact us

Pride Angel will be exhibiting at the Alternative Families Show and we are happy to help answer any questions you may have regarding:

Choosing to use a known donor
Co-parenting arrangements
Health screening
Fertility law
Home insemination

We look forward to seeing you there. Pride Angel

To read more go to http://bit.ly/9GlgwM