Holy crap! German legal decision on sperm donors

[crimsonandclover]

Today a German court decided that children of sperm donors have the same rights as any other biological children or, the other way around, that sperm donors have the same obligations as any other biological fathers. That means they could be required to pay child support, the children have a right to know who they are (esp. to find out medical history), and the children have the right to inherit (in Germany you can't completely cut children out of your will - they have to receive a certain minimum percentage).

!!

I should also say that Germany does not allow women to carry eggs that are not their own. That means no egg donation and no surrogacy. Couples who need egg donation travel to other European countries like Spain to have the procedures done.

Is this crazy? What do you think about it?

[kleigh926]

I think it's crazy. Wouldn't this keep a lot of men from donating who otherwise would want to help a couple who can't conceive?

[laketide]

I think this is crazy. Women who need sperm donors aren't looking for a father for a child - just a way to have a child. Who would want to donate knowing this?

[sagen]

That is crazy! I don't agree at all.

[crimsonandclover]

Well, they interviewed one donor on the news who said he would still continue donating because he wants to help people who can't have children to be able to have a family. The comment on the news was that the thought that someday a whole "soccer team" of children could stand at his door demanding child support doesn't bother him.

So apparently it's not going to scare everyone off, but still. I bet it will stop quite a few. And what about men who have already donated? I wonder if there's going to be a flood of requests for their sperm to be taken out of the pools (gross mental image... I mean pool in a non-literal sense, of course.).

[dc2london]

Whoa. That's major. Germany has been getting awfully Nanny State-ish, hasn't it

[dc2london]

I mean, I can see both sides of this one. That's a really tough call. I'd be interested to read the ruling.

[expatmama]

Yikes, that's pretty rough. Here the issue has been under debate because it affects gay couples and their desire to start a family. And surrogates are not legal here, neither is egg donation. But I don't think there have been any actual lawsuits about it yet.

[kbates85]

Jan 28, 2015 13:49:03 GMT -5 crimsonandclover said:

Well, they interviewed one donor on the news who said he would still continue donating because he wants to help people who can't have children to be able to have a family. The comment on the news was that the thought that someday a whole "soccer team" of children could stand at his door demanding child support doesn't bother him.

So apparently it's not going to scare everyone off, but still. I bet it will stop quite a few. And what about men who have already donated? I wonder if there's going to be a flood of requests for their sperm to be taken out of the pools (gross mental image... I mean pool in a non-literal sense, of course.).

::shudders:: still picturing a pools full of sperm

On a serious note, I would also think this could be a deal breaker for people to were considering using donated sperm. Too much transparency. KWIM? Overall, I don't likey.

[dc2london]

WAIT they aren't even grandfathering in people who donated prior to this ruling? Oh hell no.

[aydee]

I don't see how the government could possibly apply this to men who donated before the ruling. Can you imagine the incredibly awkward and difficult situations that could create for donors/families who made a decision to donate or conceive with donated sperm and assumed they had complete confidentiality? What a mess.

I'm sure rates of donation will plummet after this ruling, which will limit many couples' options for conceiving, and that's just sad.

[crimsonandclover]

I have no idea about grandfathering people out of child support. I would think they would have to, because I'm sure a lot of men would not have made the decision to donate if they knew it was a possibility. I only know what I heard on the news last night - I went to bed shortly thereafter and just got up. Maybe they'll say more about it on the radio this morning, or of course I could always look it up. But I don't know that I want "sperm donation ruling" to show up in my work search history

[crimsonandclover]

Jan 28, 2015 14:54:26 GMT -5 dc2london said:

I mean, I can see both sides of this one. That's a really tough call. I'd be interested to read the ruling.

I can see the medical history argument. But child support? in any case of sperm donation, people are making a conscious and active decision to conceive a child. Whether it's a woman doing it alone or a homo/heterosexual couple, I think that assuming all financial obligations for the child needs to be part of it. If I imagine myself as a single woman using a sperm bank, I also can't see wanting to link myself to a sperm donor like that.

I'm assuming, btw, that this also means the donors have visitation rights if they choose to press the issue. That would follow from the logic of the court, anyway. All rights and obligations.

[2moms2be]

Ok WHAT?!?!? This scares the shit out of me (not from my family as we aren't in Germany) as the implications are insane. We used a donor from a bank for the pure reason of anonymity. We didn't want some stranger deciding he wanted to be a day 6 years from now and suing for custody. On the flip side of this what comes to my mind is this scenario. Hey so we used your sperm from a bank but now we have decided we want some help financially so let me sue you and give you part of the custody because my wife/husband/so left me all alone with this child. This child who you do not know nor have any emotional connection to.

Also from the other side - Donor still single not married and getting up in age decides his time for his own kids has passed him by so now let me sue for rights to a child I donated my sperm for and get partial custody. What is that child is older and fully aware of these things... think of the emotional mind screw that is.

If this ruling was in place here we would have never had kids as the risk would have been too big for us to have someone just waltz in. We don't know anymore than the basics of our donor. We don't even know if he agrees with our same sex family.

Now the one part I do agree with is the donor being made known in the event of a medical issue. I am not saying the donor need any contact with the family but we did choose a donor who was willing to work through the bank for communication with us if we needed more detail around medical history for one of the kids.

I know that's extreme but its going to happen. Great job Germany *insert sarcastic eye roll*