A husband and wife come together to make their offspring. This statement was one of the core teachings the Jesus taught, and still stands as moral teaching for many today. However, there is not always a man and a woman. There are single females, homosexual couples, and infertile couples that still want the joys of an offspring. Sperm donation is one way that people in this position are creating an offspring. As this practice becomes more popular in the 21st century, many question its morality.
Before looking into the morality of sperm donation, it is important to understand the background of the practice. The definition of sperm donation is “the process whereby a fertile woman is inseminated using sperm from a man other than her partner (Sydsjo). ” People who receive sperm donations are single women, infertile couples, or homosexual couples. The only other options for having a child are adoption or another type of third party reproduction. For many people adoption can take years, and third party reproductions bring up the same moral questions as sperm donation.
The most common way to receive a donation is by going to a sperm bank. The United States has a total of 675 sperm banks (Newton-Small). Out of these 675 sperm banks, there is only one sperm bank located in the state of Iowa. It is at the University of Iowa in Iowa City. However, there are no sperm banks located in the nearby states of North Dakota, South Dakota, and Nebraska. California is home to the largest sperm bank which is called the California Cryobank. The California Cryobank collected $23 million dollars in sales last year alone (Newton-Small).
The United State’s sperm banks make approximately $100 million dollars annually from the process of sperm donation (Newton-Small). When looking at these numbers it is easy to see that it is a large economy in the United States. The United State’s sperm banks control 65% of the global economy of sperm donation (Newton-Small). Aside from the question of morality, it is obvious that the practice is continuing to become popular in the United States. Women are able to enter sperm banks and request sperm from anonymous men that they feel have desirable traits.
In the 20th century, all donors used to be anonymous (Dockterman). People were looked down on if they donated or received sperm. This is where the process varies today. Although most men do not go around flaunting the fact that they donate sperm, it is not unheard of for a woman to admit to receiving the donation. Today some countries have come up with a law that they feel relieves some of the moral issues that people have with sperm donation. “A donor conceived child is entitled to request and receive their donor’s name and last known address, once they reach the age of 18” (Cohen).
The countries with this law are Sweden, Austria, Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Norway, New Zealand, Australia, and most recently the United Kingdom. They feel that the donor child is deprived if he or she is not able to know who their real father is (Cohen). In the United States, a man can choose whether to be fully anonymous or not. Many times the child is able to find the father through the help of the sperm bank once they reach the age of 18. So even though some people find the anonymous donor to be immoral, there are ways to go around this part of the practice.
It can be said that the process of “shopping around” for sperm is much like genetic engineering (Zodrow). Women walk in, select desirable traits, and walk out. There is a lot of information to back up both sides of this spectrum. It can be seen as immoral or convenient. It seems crazy that someone could name off exactly what they want their child to look like, but that is what a woman is asked to do when she enters the sperm bank. “The most commonly requested donor is 6’0” tall, blond or brown hair, blue or green eyes, medium complexion, medium build with dimples and a college education” (Zodrow).
The definition of genetic engineering from Websters dictionary is “the science of making changes to the genes of a plant or animal to produce a desired result. ” When compared to the process of choosing sperm, there is an obvious connection. One child that was conceived by sperm donation felt strongly towards the immorality of the practice. This child talked about sperm donation “likening the buying and selling of gametes to human trafficking” (Bleyer). This is just another instance where people question the morality of sperm donation.
Is it right for a person to choose the outcome of another? One of the biggest problems that people see with the process of sperm donation is the donor. There are questions about the safety that goes into selecting the donors, and the immorality of having an excessive amount of children. Becoming a sperm donor is an extensive process. It is a process that is much more difficult than most people realize. Men must go through 180 days of testing before they are able to donate (Newton-Small). This includes mental, physical, and emotion testing. These tests are required by every sperm bank.
If a man fails to pass any three of these tests he is unable to be a sperm donor. Only about half of the men that attempt these tests actually make the cut (Dockterman). This gives a sense of security to the women receiving the sperm donations. However, there is still the question as to why the men are donating sperm. Eighty percent of men donate sperm for extra cash (Dockterman). Twenty percent of men are “ older men in their 30’s, maybe with children, donating to help people, donating to give back to someone infertile that they know” (Dockterman).
One stereotype of sperm donation is that men who donate have hundreds of kids. This is inaccurate. It is not very probable to have a large number of offspring like 500 (Dockterman). Taking a look at the statistics, the unlikeliness of a male having 500 offspring makes sense. There are 675 sperm banks in the United States. Even though it is becoming more popular, sperm donations are not a common way to receive a child. There is not a very good chance of the same man being chosen over 500 times, and having 500 successful births.
Although the systems of sperm banks try to have some control on how many times a specific donor is chosen, there is no accurate way of keeping records. Therefore, no average can be drawn. Eleanor Nicole at the American Society for Reproduction Medicine stated that “It’s about quality control rather than quantity control”. This is saying that the people running the sperm banks would rather look more closely at the safeness of the donor than how often his sperm is chosen.
When it comes down to it, the biggest issue with the entire practice of sperm donation is not the donor or the recipient, rather the child. Louise Brown was born July 25, 1978 in the city of Philadelphia. She was the first recorded child born from a sperm donation. The birth of Louise brought an innovation into the world of pregnancy. Although at the time it brought a lot of joy to those who could not conceive, people question the morality of the effects on the child. “It has been argued that the person who generates the child is parentally responsible for the child” (Weinberg).
If the child is genetically half of the father, should he have to take care of this child? This is one of the main reasons that donation is anonymous. As stated before, many of the donors are giving for the extra money. These men are not signing up to be legal guardians. However, if the parents were to die, should the donor have to take the child? These are the questions of morality that are raised. Most of the question about sperm donation are being brought up by sperm donation conceived children themselves (Bleyer).
“Thirty-three percent of donor-conceived people feel bad about their conception; twenty-five percent are neutral and forty percent feel positive but intensely curious about their genetic background” (Bleyer). For those children that are interested, finding their donor is not a difficult task. The online Donor Sibling Registry makes it easy to connect with all the half siblings the person may have. Just by entering the donor number, the child can find siblings and the donor with a little searching. Keeping the donor anonymous can be thought of as morally wrong.
One sperm donation conceived child stated: “There’s something fundamentally unethical and cruel about cutting people off from half of their genetic parentage” (Bleyer). This is the fuel that fires many people to go out and find their donors. After reading this paper, it would be easy to sway towards believing that the practice of sperm donation is moral. Many different aspects of this paper show that much testing and planning goes into the sperm donation process. However, the Catholic Church does not agree with this practice. According to the Catholic Church, sperm donation is immoral.
Catholics believe that the conception of a child should be done naturally. Any practice that encourages procreation artificially is against the Church. There are TV series and even movies about this intriguing topic. Many questions its morality, but a lot of good comes from it as well. It is said that adoption can satisfy a child’s needs, but sperm donation satisfies the needs of those unable to conceive (Weinberg). The question of morality comes down to the question of responsibility of the donor, and the welfare of the child.
