Britain's fertility regulator is planning big changes to the strict rules governing egg and sperm donation in order to try to stop more childless couples from seeking treatment abroad.
The sweeping liberalisation would see the most significant shift in policy governing sperm and egg donation since the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) was established. The changes could see the amount paid to women who donate eggs rise from £250 to several thousand pounds – but experts have warned the move would see women donating eggs purely for money.
Donated sperm could also be used to start as many as 20 families rather than the current limit of 10, despite fears such a move would increase the risk of half-siblings unwittingly marrying or having children together.
The madness is that each year in Britain, hundreds of thousands of perfectly healthy embryos are lost through abortion. Why can't the NHS get its act together and arrange for pregnant mothers who cannot bring up their children can have them adopted by couples who want children but can't have them?
This would solve two problems at once and save a small fortune. And not only that. These procedures are risky and the children produced by these artificial interventions can have lifelong health problems.
The sweeping liberalisation would see the most significant shift in policy governing sperm and egg donation since the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) was established. The changes could see the amount paid to women who donate eggs rise from £250 to several thousand pounds – but experts have warned the move would see women donating eggs purely for money.
Donated sperm could also be used to start as many as 20 families rather than the current limit of 10, despite fears such a move would increase the risk of half-siblings unwittingly marrying or having children together.
The madness is that each year in Britain, hundreds of thousands of perfectly healthy embryos are lost through abortion. Why can't the NHS get its act together and arrange for pregnant mothers who cannot bring up their children can have them adopted by couples who want children but can't have them?
This would solve two problems at once and save a small fortune. And not only that. These procedures are risky and the children produced by these artificial interventions can have lifelong health problems.
Kommentarer
Many children in need of adoption have impairments or medical issues, frequently as a result of alcohol or drug use by their mothers. This means not all prospective parents are able, or willing, to adopt them.
Another (not inconsiderable) consideration is the feelings of parents. There are significant emotional and evolutionary reasons while people crave their own biological children. The 'solution' of supplying children for adoption does not take this into account, even before we take into account any issues these children may have.
Your idea that an alternative to abortion is simply to ask women to carry unwanted children to full term before giving them away is strange. How do you think these women would feel about this practice?
Women I know who have had abortions end up regretting it and wondering how those children would have turned out. Besides which, isn't abortion legalised murder, I mean when does the blob of jelly actually become a person?
"Another (not inconsiderable) consideration is the feelings of parents. There are significant emotional and evolutionary reasons while people crave their own biological children. The 'solution' of supplying children for adoption does not take this into account, even before we take into account any issues these children may have"
Yes but some parent might like the option. There is no guarantee that one's own children are going to turn out 100%. All sorts of things can go wrong between -0.75 and, say 18 years