Egg donation holds more value than just money

I always thought women who sold their eggs for money were only characters in Lifetime movies or weird 20-something college dropouts trying to make a quick buck. A few months ago, however, a friend of mine told me she was planning on studying abroad and when I asked her how she was financing her trip, she casually replied, “Oh, I’m selling my eggs.”

Immediately I had a hundred questions racing through my head. “Why are you selling them? Who are you selling them to? Are you going through a random Craigslist ad or a legit agency?”  She told me that donating was an easy decision, knowing her eggs would help a couple have the child they always wanted and the money would pay her rent and finance the trip of a lifetime.

The idea of selling my eggs never sounded too appealing to me. But as my friend went on to tell me she made $8,000 from the transaction, and as she explained to me her reasons for donating, I became more intrigued with the idea.

San Francisco is not cheap. I’ve been living in this city a little more than a year now and I have already acquired $15,000 worth of debt. I knew living on my own wouldn’t be easy but I didn’t know pursing the life and education I always dreamed of would cost me so much. I’m a full time student who works part-time and barely makes enough to keep my head above water. If I work extra hours my grades suffer but if I don’t work at least four to five times a week, I can say goodbye to my social life and hello to eating microwave burritos for an entire month.

The conversation with my friend left me wondering, what if my purpose on this earth isn’t to grow up, get married and have a family? What if my purpose is to help someone whom I’ve never met create a family of his or her own?

With the reality of being a broke post-grad with a degree in liberal arts sinking in, I started to think more about my friends egg-donating experience and began to do some research of my own.

To become a donor, I would have to go through a psychological screening. This is to ensure that I would fully understand the benefits and risks of egg donation. Basically, psychologist and agencies want to make sure I am aware that donating my eggs would mean there would be a kid out in the world somewhere who looks just like me.

Apparently for females, passing on our genes is not as easy as ejaculating into a cup. The actual egg-donating procedure is relatively painless and takes only about 30 minutes but for about three weeks prior, you have to physically, mentally and hormonally prepare your body for the egg retrieval, according to Egg DonorAmerica’s website.

After taking all the health and psychological risks into consideration, I’ve decided that injecting myself with hormones for a couple thousand dollars isn’t such a far-fetched option after all. If I ever decide to donate specifically to get out of financial bind, I think I would try first exhausting all other options–loans, waitressing or asking my parents for money. With a conscious mind and a good heart, I would consider donating my eggs as a good deed. I’m not sure if I will ever really decide to donate or if I will have children in the future, but if I do, I would proudly tell them that when mommy was in college she had the opportunity to help a family create their miracle baby. For me, that’s one benefit that outweighs any risk.

Written by
Latest comments
  • That’s a kind of reaction that is created when something is praised so much, like it was with egg donating in the beginning you could read about how wonderful and altruistic it is and later was the reaction, completely extreme but in another direction. All of the sudden the internet was full of articles regarding egg donations exploiting women and that it is just about the money. Really the truth is in the middle, Egg donation itself is a great idea, of course there are controversies but in the end it’s about the people who can’t have kids and this is their only dream. People donating the eggs are adults, they get money which they need and help people in need. Best Regards! – EggDonationFriends.com

    • Hi you have a kind nature to look at the positive side of what these women do in addition to donating eggs, of course they agree to give up their own children if any are born – not in court, they just agree not to acknowledge them as their own children and promise not to assume their parental responsibilities that one legally has to assume for their own offspring at birth. Not all women who donate eggs make that promise, some merely donate eggs for research. Of the ones who do make the promise of course not all of them can go through with the promise to abandon their offspring and when they are born will fight for shared custody and fight to provide their child what everyone owes their own kid.

      Can I ask why you think “Egg donation itself is a great idea, of course there are controversies but in the end it’s about the people who can’t have kids and this is their only dream”? I mean since nobody is accidentally loosing a bio parent its all deliberate abandonment not out of tragedy or negligence but charity or commerce. It’s obviously not a great thing for the child that gets abandoned by the bio parent. As much as the unrelated person raising them might have wanted to raise someone else’s child they could go find someone who really needed to be raised instead of asking person to abandon their child because the illigitimate ones don’t count or something. As much as that person who can’t have kids would have liked to have simply reproduced and have her own bio kids that kid is going to wish they could just have their own bio mom no matter how much they love her they still suffered a horrid tragedy in order to be raised by her. One that was unnecessary. We should just make people who promise t abandon under contract raise their kids. We do it for everyone else

      • “As much as the unrelated person raising them might have wanted to raise someone else’s child they could go find someone who really needed to be raised instead of asking person to abandon their child because the illigitimate ones don’t count or something.”

        Same could be said for couple who wants a kid, they could adopt a child who needs a home. Why do we always shame infertiles for not adopting yet give fertiles a pass?

        • Fertile people deciding whether or not to. Mate with donors are discouraged from doing so because their offspring won’t receive the care and support all minors are entitled to from both their bio parents; they won’t have the same legal rights as other people and they and the relatives of their absent parent won’t be considered legal kin and may never meet or even know one another’s identities or even that one another exist. The alternatives suggested are to opt to find a mate who will provide their offspring what they deserve so their offspring has two responsible accountable bio parents or, if they must raise an abandoned minor for some reason, find one whose abandonment was not for the purpose of giving them a kid to raise without the interference of the bio parent.

          It’s not like I said find an already abandoned kid because the world should use up the existing kids before making new ones! Just don’t make any new abandonments or at least don’t request any new abandonments

          • Fertile people are the primary recipients of comments to discourage mating with gamete donors because they are in a position where they are actually able to make a new person and why would they want their kid to suffer that loss why do they think their kid only deserves one bio parent acting responsibly? Infertile people are often married to a fertile person who has the choice of having a kid with a responsible person or an irresponsible one. Why would they want their spouses kid to suffer a loss? If they don’t mind their spouse having a kid with another person they shouldn’t mind the other person acting like the other parent cause they are and their spouses kid deserves that.

            Infertile people who would ask two bio parents to abandon a kid just so they can control the quality of minor they get to raise are also discouraged from special requesting parents not to raise their kid.

            There is no reason to suggest adoption to someone and their partner if they can have their own offspring because their offspring will get what they deserve from both bio parents. Their offspring won’t have to suffer a loss of a bio parent in order to be raised by them.

            Preventing tragic loss where it is preventable is the point. A child is not responsible for an adult never having a bio child to raise so an adult should not be responsible for a child not being raised by a bio parent

          • Child welfare meaning kids who are either in Foster Care or available for adoption has nothing to do with infertility. Do you agree or disagree? If you agree then there is no reason it should be suggested to an infertile couple under any circumstances no more so than a fertile couple wanting to either start or expand their family.

            My point is not about an objection to third party reproduction but rather bringing up adoption when it is not relevant to your argument against third party reproduction.

          • Certainly it’s relevant if someone is contemplating raising an abandoned child pick one that is already abandoned don’t commission the abandonment – it’s a tragedy for Pete sake when someone has a bio parent who failed to raise them and take responsibility for them.

            Your also acting like a fertile person would never hear the suggestion to adopt and they certainly would hear that suggestion if they were talking about asking the other parent of their offspring to abandon them just so they could raise them alone or with a partner they are unable to reproduce with. So don’t think fertile people are exempt from the suggestion especially if the suggestion to find someone to have kids with who want’s to be a parent as well. They are so focused on their marriages they forget that they are going to force someone’s family apart – why can’t they raise their kid with the other parent and still be married to their spouse? Millions of people do it all the time if they are not together romantically with the other parent of their child.

            People that have and raise their own kids are not causing a tragic loss for the child from that and neither are people who act as guardians or adoptive parents when a kid has no family to take care of them but people who ask for parents to abandon their kids are an accessory to horrible loss. That’s why people who can have their own kids are not told to adopt instead – they are not creating a tragedy by commissioning someone’s abandonment.

          • Put aside your views on abandonment and look at things in a simple way. Adoption is about child welfare. Adoption exists for children who need families to raise them. The concept of Donor Conception was developed to create babies for people who for whatever reason are unable to do so through intercourse conception. Do you see how these aren’t relevant?

            I don’t intend to change your views on donor conception and how you view it as abandonment. But my hope is that you and others who didn’t adopt themselves stop guilting infertile couples into adopting. To me your goal is to stop the practice of donor conception not to push infertile couples into adoption children that you refused to. Your argument gets weakened when you suggest infertile couples should adopt especially when you lack credibility on adopting.

          • Greg I do get what you are trying to say. You feel like it’s not fair that all the infertile people wind up having to raise all the displaced and maladjusted children of the world while fertile people get to make their own nice fresh new ones from scratch so they don’t have to deal with all the baggage and psychological damage that comes with raising someone else’s relinquished or abandoned child. You feel like if the welfare of displaced children were so important to the people who are telling infertile people to adopt, they should have adopted a kid with attachment disorder themselves.

            But the suggestion is not made out of a concern to use up all the existing children before any new ones are made; the suggestion is made out of a desire to not see any more kids be abandoned by one or both bio parents and separated from their own families. There are plenty enough people abandoning their kids as it is and it is horrid that people would think its OK to go out and ask someone to abandon their kid just so they could have a higher quality kid with less baggage to deal with. So taken in that light someone who is not creating a wold full of more abandoned children certainly has room to suggest that other people not be the reason that more kids are abandoned. If they really want to raise a kid and they cannot make one on their own then go be a guardian or adopt a kid that is already abandoned or relinquished don’t create more tragedy just to make yourself happy. No amount of love or care or intention will erase the tragedy that kid experiences by the loss of a bio parent in a parental caregiving capacity so a wise person would want nothing at all to do with the reason a child was not raised by a bio parent. Certainly the worst thing to say to a person is that their bio parent did not want to be a parent that they are not raising them because they wanted to give someone else a chance to be a parent and start a family. That screams that their bio parents have no respect for them and neither does anyone else playing the roll of parent socially. That is treatment like property by everyone involved and it’s dehumanizing

          • Also please remember that donor conception means a donor’s conception with a member of the opposite sex who may or may not be another donor. A donor is a human and so is their offspring. Donor offspring are human offspring. Infertile people are not conceiving their own children by using donor gametes. Donors are conceiving (donor conception) and the donor end’s up with the donor’s offspring. All the donor doesn’t do is raise their own offspring. A person has two biological parents and if one is absent and they were not adopted it means they were abandoned by that parent at birth – it does not matter what you call them, donor or dead beat the end result is the same – someone suffers the tragic loss of a parent
            You said donor conception was created to create kids for people who can’t have them the normal way but kids are not created for anyone. Bio parents don’t create their offspring for themselves so they certainly don’t create them for other people. Offspring belong to their parents only in the sense that they are responsible for their existence and owe them a debt of care. Look at this in a simple way yourself – if someone is not raised by one of their bio parents and they were not relinquished in court it means they were abandoned.. My goal is to encourage people with offspring to be accountable for their kids and take full responsibility for them on the record as parents are supposed to. If someone is unable to have their own kids and still wants to raise one then there are more than enough kids in need of someone to take on that responsibility. If a person is looking for an abandoned kid to raise there are tons of them sadly don’t commission parents to abandon any new ones

          • I never used the word “can’t”. I said those people (infertile, same sex couples and single people) are unable to conceive a child. It’s the ability that they lack.

            I understand what your goal is (though I disagree with it). But that goal has nothing to do with adoption and thus should be dropped from your argument especially since you passed on adopting yourself which is your right.

          • unable and can’t (can not) are the same thing.

          • Also, not all kids available to be adopted are abandoned. Some of them have been removed from their parents. That’s not abandonment.

          • I don’t think all kids available for adoption were abandoned. Where did you get that idea? Some are orphaned, some are relinquished, some are removed by the state for cause, others are abandoned. It runs the gamete, so to speak. Speaking of gametes, donor offspring are always abandoned by their absent parent, some change their minds and turn the bad situation around by taking responsibility for their kids after having agreed to abandon them or actually abanding them but most don’t. They have offspring that they are not raising and they did not go to court and relinquish all they did was promise to be irresponsible when they were born. If they keep their promise then they’ve abandoned

          • I got that idea from you talking about infertile people adopting kids that were abandoned. It’s not as if a person interested in adopting goes into it and says I only want the kids who were left on door steps. So I think you should drop the whole suggestion of infertile people adopting abandoned kids rather than pursuing donor conception. In addition to not holding fertile couples to the same standard.

            As for your argument against the practice of donor conception, you and I have been through it many times we just aren’t going to agree on it so there’s no point in discussing it further.

          • “So I think you should drop the whole suggestion of infertile people adopting abandoned kids rather than pursuing donor conception. In addition to not holding fertile couples to the same standard.”

            Greg do you understand what donor conception is? Donors are human beings like everyone else and they conceive children the same way everyone else does and their offspring are related to them to the same extent as any person who is not classified as a gamete donor. They are just people who agree not to raise their illegitimate offspring and they cannot keep that promise until their kids are actually born. So when they have kids that they are not raising and did not relinquish in court it means they’ve abandoned them. So when people “use donor conception” to have a kid all it means is that they requested some parent abandon a kid for them to raise.

          • My point about adopting “abandoned” kids needing to be dropped by you is about not all kids being available for adoption being abandoned. It has nothing to do with your opinions on donor conception.

          • Greg you said “My point about adopting “abandoned” kids needing to be dropped by you is about not all kids being available for adoption being abandoned. It has nothing to do with your opinions on donor conception.”
            OK great then they can adopt/be a guardian to a relinquished kid or a kid taken from their parents for cause or they can adopt/be a guardian to an orphan or they can adopt/be a guardian to an abandoned child. Whatever! The point is don’t be the reason the absent parent is absent!

            People must get it through their heads that if they are the reason that a biological parent opts to be absent and not accountable as a parent they are causing a huge problem for the person who will only be wanted by one of their two biological parents!

            How can the suggestion of adopting or being a guardian be dropped in the conversation when so frequently the response to telling someone not to subject a person to rejection by one of their parents is “then what are we supposed to do? Don’t we deserve to be parents too?”

          • And I am certainly no fan of adoption the way it exists today and you know it. I don’t think the parents should have their responsibilities entirely stripped of them ever because you don’t just stop being your offspring’s parent because someone else raises them. Their authority could be stripped and given to whoever is raising their children without taking away their title as parent and without taking away their children’s rights as their children as members of their own family.

            Adoption creates an adoptive family in addition to the family that already exists, it does not replace their family. You hear adopted people say they have two mothers or two fathers all the time – well the law should reflect reality rather than trying to create a false alternative universe. That is the bad part of adoption. The good part is that they at least have to try to identify the biological parents on the person’s birth record before an adoption can go through and they vet the reasoning behind the parent not raising their kid first and try to find family members to raise them before an adoption can go through. Also they background check the unrelated individuals and get their express consent to taking parental responsibility for another person’s child so there is no question they are not having the responsibility forced on them. None of that disinterested third party vetting occurs

          • If this is the case then I have no idea why you would even suggest adoption as an alternative for infertile couples who want to become parents rather than the practice of donor conception.

          • “If this is the case then I have no idea why you would even suggest adoption as an alternative for infertile couples who want to become parents rather than the practice of donor conception.” The reason for suggesting it as an alternative is so that the people don’t commission the destruction of someone’s identity by requesting that one of their bio parents not take responsibility for them. The reason for suggesting it as an alternative is that minors have legal protection against being trafficked through the court approval process for either guardianship or adoption so to go around that court approval process for convenience is to deny the minor their due process among other things.

          • But Marilynn you don’t like adoption. It’s like the choice between being blind and deaf for you and saying that at least being deaf I can see what’s going on around me. You know you don’t want non biological families formed so don’t suggest it. Be true to your beliefs.

          • The meager protections afforded to minors from trafficking are offered to minors in court approved adoption or guardianship. Adoption and guardianship are supposed to have third party oversight to reduce the incidence where minors are objectified and traded as commodities like live stock or property. The legal disadvantages to being adopted are slowly changing and people can fight to change those laws. The underlying commodity based mentality of minors being traded off the record by bio parents who are gamete donors is a horrible abuse of human rights that includes and exceeds the human rights violations of adopted people. It’s just so freaking tragic all the way around.

          • Again you shouldn’t be suggesting anything. Take the honest approach rather than the hypocritical one.

          • It’s a free country, I’ll suggest whatever I feel like suggesting.

          • Then continue to expect me to take you on in these discussions

          • You stalk me where ever I comment. You show up to say nasty things to me without ever actually defending your position. I don’t expect anything from you I don’t think about you at all. It’s a free country post wherever you want.

          • I’ll go back to not responding to your comments, this was stupid I should not have replied to you. I’ll just reply around you.

          • My position is to defend infertile couples where they are put down and that donor conception and adoption have nothing to do with one another.

          • I can appreciate that your position is to defend infertile people (do you care if someone is partnered or not?) Why do you view a couple as being infertile because one member is infertile? Clearly if one member is not infertile then wouldn’t the couple then be equally considered fertile? In when the fertile member of a couple exercises their fertility options by having a child with a person outside the marriage, like a donor or a milk man – based on your previous comments the fertile person and their infertile spouse would no longer qualify as being called an infertile couple by you since one of them had a child wouldn’t you equally attach the fertile partners fertility to the infertile member then? I’m just trying to get clear why you’d consider that couple to be infertile for the purpose of your point which was that fertile couples never get told to try adoption instead of conceiving with a donor. Generally one member is fertile. Can you elaborate on that? Regardless whether you think the suggestion to adopt is good or bad I’m trying to figure out who you think of as fertile or infertile. If the couple decided to act like the infertile partner and not have the fertile one have kids I would say yes, but

          • “Why do you view a couple as being infertile because one member is infertile?”

            Can a couple conceive a biological child together if one person is infertile? Of course not. Thus the couple is infertile.

            “I’m just trying to get clear why you’d consider that couple to be infertile for the purpose of your point which was that fertile couples never get told to try adoption instead of conceiving with a donor. ”

            No, I never said fertile couples were using donor conception (a third party outside of the couple). Why would they? What I said that fertile couples are never told to adopt instead of attempting to conceive a child together. That’s where the double standard is.

          • I get what your saying but it’s all psychological mind games that people get their heads thinking. It’s interesting to think about the self deception people often have when it comes to their own offspring with people who are not their spouses or romantic partners, its as if they look at themselves as only related to their offspring if their offspring were made with someone they love or are in a relationship with. Otherwise they view them as somehow less related or less important. In many instances they can disconnect completely from the fact that it makes no difference who you have a child with the child is yours equally no matter who the other parent is. But you are right in that people do tend to think of a couple as it’s own thing rather than as two free and independent human beings with their own minds and bodies. I mean would it be fair in your eyes for someone to call themselves infertile if they simply had no romantic partner to have a child with? Or if they were fertile but paired with a member of the same sex? Is infertile really the right term for it? Should medical terminology be applied to social issues? Should doctors be vending medical treatment to people that don’t have medical problems? What is the difference between a customer and a patient? What is the difference between a business and a professional practice?

          • Psychological mind game? How is the fact that if a couple can’t conceive that they are infertile psychological mind games?

            I’m not talking about donor conception, same sex couples or single people who aren’t married or in a committed relationship. I’m talking about couples made up of a man and woman in a committed relationship (legally married or otherwise) who are of child bearing years who for whatever medical reason are unable to conceive a child. Those couples are infertile whether the infertility is with one person or both.

            For these infertile couples we should not be suggesting they adopt when we don’t hold fertile couples (heterosexual who are married or in a committed relationship) to adopt.

          • You go on this long trip about how unfair it is that fertile couples don’t get told to adopt and I say fertile people contemplating having donor offspring are advised to pursue adoption as an alternative to that all the time and you disregard that and try to say that their fertileness does not count because they are with an infertile person – like knowing an infertile person or being married to one could ever fully inform a person of what it feels like to be told they can never have kids. That’s usually your big platform how nobody whose been diagnosed infertile who winds up having kids can even speak on the subject with any credibility about how it feels to be diagnosed infertile and what they did in those circumstances. Guess what lots of fertile people told to adopt instead of have kids with a donor because their partner is infertile, they up and leave their partner and have kids with someone else which is very sad for their partner indeed but it kind of takes the rug out from under your point that they ever qualified as an infertile person receiving the message to just adopt. Your a bigger hypocrite cause you don’t have an explanation for why your even suggesting they’re infertile in the first place. I’m saying up front court approved adoption and guardianship protect against trafficking which is the first order of business. Second order of business is to equalize the rights of people who are adopted with the rest of the population when it comes to their bio parents and kinship. I have a basis for my opinions you have not thought this latest rant through all the way yet.

          • You’re a lost cause. I tried to be fair with you and ask you to drop shaming infertile couples into adopting kids you and your degenerate ex husband were too selfish to adopt and stick to your advocacy against donor conception but you won’t back off. You’ll never get it. I sense a lot of guilt on your part for taking a selfish approach to having kids. But there is time for you to change that.

          • The response to your last paragraph should be that you don’t know what they should do instead. That is the most honest answer you can give them. For me and interactions I’ve had with opponents of donor conception and domestic infant adoption those who have told me that they aren’t sure what they would do if they were me are the ones who I was able to respect as well as have productive dialogues with.

          • I’ve given that reply even to you and your response is to say that I don’t think the people deserve to be parents. Which is not true parenthood is not an award that I or anyone else gives to the most deserving people it’s just a matter of either having offspring or not having them. If they want another person’s kid to raise there are these other ethical ways but it’s not like having a donor conceive is going to let them have their own kid if they are not actually mating with the donor themselves

          • It’s not up to you to find alternatives for people. That’s not your goal. Your goal is to stop the practice of donor conception. What they do instead should be none of your concern.

          • For anyone considering raising another person’s child I’ll continue to suggest that they do so in ways that protect minors from child trafficking and black or grey market adoptions handled out of court and off the record. It’s far too important of an issue to be silent upon and if people are going to talk about how openness in this process is becoming more like openness in adoption I will submit over and over again that if it is so much like adoption then they should simply adopt the way others are required to do in order to gain parental authority over someone else’s offspring.

          • Again I’m not telling you to go silent on advocating against the practice of donor conception. I’m telling you to stop shaming infertile couples into adopting kids you were too selfish to adopt.

          • Let’s have you define what you mean by shame or shaming because I steer clear from talking about morals and focus on the legal inequities that donor offspring are subjected to. People who special request the abandonment of a child by a biological parent are putting another human being at a disadvantage by being the reason the parent is absent. We are not talking about being the reason for their absence on accident through carelessness or negligence even but the reason for their absence by design on purpose. I’m appealing to their sense of fairness and justice and if that is not jarring enough for them appealing to their sense of logic about the likely outcome of how someone would feel towards them for having been the reason their parent was not around. Shame is useless. I don’t want people to feel badly I want them to feel that they are not going to hurt anyone in their attempt to find a child to raise.

          • See if your objective was to just focus on the kids you wouldn’t even be suggesting alternatives for infertile couples. The shaming part comes into play when you suggest they adopt. Its like they pass on doing something where they are helping kids rather than doing something where they are helping kids. You of all people should know it’s not an easy decision to make. You passed on adoption for your own reasons. People pass on adoption for their own reasons. You can disapprove them choosing the practice of donor conception but you are wrong to judge them and suggest they adopt when it was a decision you were unable to make. In all honesty I don’t judge you for that. Not when currently we’re going down a similar path to the one you did.

          • I feel like we should hold fertile people to the same standard as infertile people when it comes to adopting kids who need families to raise them.

            If your desire is to prevent more donor conceived children from being born then what does adoption have to do with it? The answer is that it shouldn’t. There shouldn’t be any suggestions of what to do instead because that is not relevant to your argument.

          • No my desire is not to prevent gamete donors from having children it’s to keep them from abandoning their children. Of course fertile people are held to the same standard as infertile people when it comes to adopting kids who need families to raise them obviously every time some fertile person talks about wanting to have a kid with a gamete donor and I say if you really want to raise an abandoned kid find one already abandoned don’t request it. Tell it to way more fertile people than infertile people since in the end they are the ones who have the responsibility to their offspring.

          • I said your desire is to stop the practice of donor conception. By that I mean your desire is to not so much stop the conception part but the non biological parent from raising and supporting the child. That has NOTHING to do with adoption.

            Fertile people aren’t held to the same standard of adopting kids. This isn’t just about donor conception even with going through infertility treatments (non donor conception involved) infertile couples are told why don’t they just adopt instead. No one tells a fertile couple why don’t they just adopt instead of trying to conceive another child or when they talk of them about to begin trying to have kids.

            This is why I continued to pound you on the decision you made instead of adopting. To make a point that I was hoping you’d get but you never did. Was I wrong for suggesting you should have adopted instead? Yes, I may have not done the same thing you did and opposed you passing along you did but I should not have judged you for not adopting instead.

            Your opposition to the practice of donor conception isn’t wrong but your shaming of infertile/same sex couples and singles to adopt instead is wrong. Your opposition to non biological families I take issue with as well. We won’t agree on those issues but I hope that you’ll now finally just stick to your opposition to the donor conception practice and drop the suggestion of others to adopt.

          • Greg when people take care of their own offspring like they are supposed to like their offspring surely deserve, there is no need for anyone else to step in and raise or support another person’s child and that is a good thing. No non-biological parents would be hurt because there would not be any in a situation where both parents are caring for their own offspring. Nobody looses in that situation. Nobody. This has nothing to do with preventing non-biological parents from doing anything I’d like to see there not be a need for them by holding people accountable for their own offspring and not abandoning them as a service a gift or an act of commerce.

            “No one tells a fertile couple why don’t they just adopt instead of trying to conceive another child or when they talk of them about to begin trying to have kids.” Individuals are fertile or infertile and fertile individuals are frequently told to think about adoption as an alternative to having kids with a gamete donor. So your wrong. Having an infertile or same sex or non existent partner does not make a person infertile I’m surprised you’d even say such a thing knowing how you have a very strict criteria for what qualifies a person to say they’ve struggled with infertility. If living through it and recovering from it does not qualify me as having suffered from it in your eyes someone whose never been diagnosed as such who happens to be single or happens to have a same sex or infertile partner certainly should not qualify as infertile in your eyes and they get told all the time to think about adoption rather than to commission the abandonment of their own child by the other biological parent. Your just so focused on the infertile person your forgetting that they are frequently partnered with a fertile partner whose being told to adopt instead of having their own kid. So there you go they are told to explore adoption as an alternative just as much as infertile people are you just think of them as being infertile because they are opting to stay with their infertile partners.

          • I’m not talking about individuals I am talking about couples. If at least one person in a couple is infertile then that couple is infertile. Fertile couples are made up of two people that are fertile. Fertile couples are rarely ever told they should adopt. Infertile couples however are. That is a double standard.

          • Greg you said “I’m not talking about individuals I am talking about couples. If at least one person in a couple is infertile then that couple is infertile.”

            Your so full of malarkey! OMG! Really Greg? So the fertile member of a romantic couple qualifies as being infertile and understands just like you do what it means to be told that they can never have children of their own? Your full of it. How can you sit there saying that if one member of a couple is infertile that couple is infertile? Wouldn’t they also then be equally called a fertile couple since one half of the couple is fertile and can have children? Obviously if one of them is fertile and considering having children with someone other than their infertile spouse whether its a gamete donor or the milk man it’s quite clear that at least one of the two people in the romantic couple does not consider themselves to be infertile and won’t settle for being party to such a diagnosis of never getting to have their own children.

            I’d be a lot more inclined to buy that psychologically the fertile spouse considers themselves to be infertile since their romantic partner is infertile if the fertile spouse rejected the idea of having children with a person other than their spouse. But if the fertile spouse is considering having children with a person other than their spouse whether its a gamete donor or the milk man then the fertile spouse clearly sees the infertility as not their problem but their spouse’s.

            These fertile people who can have children with any other fertile person they choose who is willing to have children with them are doing a grave disservice to their own kids if they are shopping for a reproductive partner who is willing to abandon their offspring at birth either as an act of commerce or as an act of altruism. Encouraging them to either adopt or find a reproductive partner willing to be accountable for their child as a parent is a completely reasonable thing to do considering the consequences of their kid being abandoned by the other parent.

          • Is your issue with the practice of donor conception or is it that every infertile couple doesn’t just adopt?

          • My point is we should hold fertile people to the same standards to adopting kids as we do infertile people. It’s not the job of infertile people to save the world’s children.