A Fertility Doctor Using His Own Sperm: Ethical and legal considerations | Hacker News Reader

A Fertility Doctor Using His Own Sperm: Ethical and legal considerations

thehastingscenter.org

23 pointsobjections24 comments

Wtf is everyone here claiming it's assault or a sex crime? The very beginning of the article clearly states it's legal in most states and unless these people had some stipulation as to who it came from - I see no reason why the doctor can't use his own sperm. Do you all think it would be the same transgression if a female doctor used her eggs?

How about the ethical quagmire of all the male med students in the initial years who gave their sperm under pressure or without understanding the consequences? Why is it OK to have people working under the doctor donate sperm but not the doctor himself?

Misandry these days...

It's odd that the article, which briefly addressed a few ethical issues, did not address the ethical issues regarding the underlying cause of the problem; namely, women using sperm banks.

Is there an ethical problem with the idea of sperm banks?

Off the top of my head, I can think of a couple:

- Anonymity vs non-anonymity: does a child have a right to know who their biological parent is? Is it ethical to donate, create offspring, and remain anonymous? Some family predispositions to certain health issues aren't fully understood (I didn't realize my family had a predisposition to dementia until just a couple years ago when my grandparents started nearing end of life), these genetic anomalies aren't always known at time of donation, and thus won't be handed over to the offspring. Another issue, some sperm banks send out cease and desists when the children attempt to track down the biological father. (Thanks 23andme!) Is it ethical for a sperm bank to threaten legal ramifications on people who attempt to contact their biological father?

- Age restrictions: We don't currently fully understand the effect of male age on creating children. Some studies suggest that there is a higher rate of autism, but this is only just now coming to light. Many sperm banks don't have much on age restrictions.

- Number of donor offspring: Is it ethical to allow numerous offspring from one sample? There are cases where a single male has fathered over 100 children, way way more than any normal male.

- Are sperm banks a form of eugenics? Sperm banks have differing policies on the acceptance of "Acceptable" sperm; e.g. certain height, low obesity propensity, college background, etc. If a sperm bank offers the top 1% genetic material, and people can pay to have elite genetic children, is this ethical?

It's a stretch, but maybe they're talking about anonymous vs non-anymous donors? That's the biggest thing in the ethics section of the Wikipedia page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sperm_donation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertility_tourism

Let's take a step back for a second... whether one agrees or not, it is obvious and not fairly deniable that this type of reproduction was illegal in most countries until just a few decades ago. Many major religions condemn the practice. (Until relatively recently, ALL branches of Christianity condemned it.)

It would be worth mentioning the underlying reasons for these views in such an article.

Allow me to be blunt (at the risk of getting downvoted): Does jerking off and selling your cum to strange women raise ethical issues? I think the question answers itself.

> Does jerking off and selling your cum to strange women raise ethical issues?

I agree, cum should be free. Eggs I can see paying for because the supply is limited, but things like blood or semen should be free.

Clear common law battery against the mother. It should be actionable malpractice where brought by children born of this malfeasance because of the incest risks, but most (all?) states frown upon liability for negligent childbirth.

So the children would be suing a parent for being born?

Fair question. It's unlikely to succeed (for one, wrongful birth causes of action are barred in a number of states, and the damages aren't apparent for a very long time) but there ought to be liability when one secretly fathers so many kids as to move the sibling-parentage foreseeability needle away from zero.

More likely to succeed are child support-kinds of actions and claims against the physician's estate by all of his unackd issue if he dies intestate or fails to call out and disclaim every one of them expressly in his will.

One thing is certain: This fact set has the makings of a really good bar exam essay question.

That seems like a legal can of worms and a half to open up.

Welcome to Brazil: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Abdelmassih

He's a modern day Genghis Khan. It doesn't pay to be a warlord anymore, but his genes will live on in ways ours could never hope for.

It's impregnating a woman without her consent. It's a sex crime and should be 10+ years in jail.

How much consent is needed though? IIRC Cline said in most cases that the sperm was from a medical intern. Given that he was not a medical intern, this is a lie which arguably negates consent.

Other possibilities get more murky; given that frozen sperm was not yet a solved problem, it's clear that the donor would be nearby, so what if Cline had instead said that the sperm was "From someone who works in this office" that would be factually true, if misleading. What if he didn't claim any particular source for the sperm at all?

I don't think there's a crime called "impregnating a woman without consent". Not only that, he also had consent to impregnate her. The question is about where the sperm came from, but I think it's rather unclear that this would be any kind of legal violation.

How is using sperm a patient didn’t consent to not assault?

I agree it's wrong, but assault usual implies a physical attack (or, more specifically, the threat thereof). I'm not sure this qualifies; it may be a situation where laws need tweaking to keep up with the times. Certainly malpractice, though.

The definition of sexual assault is not limited to physical battery alone.

It’s a physical attack, it’s literally inserting a baby into someone under conditions that were not consented to.

Repeating that's it's assault doesn't just make it assault. How do you know what the conditions anyone signed were? Just gleaming an opinion from a headline?

Did she explicitly consent to a specific persons sperm? Cuz if not then your entire sentence is bs.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com