New Users Registration  |  Useful Links  |  FAQ  |  Site Map 
 
Go Search

 

Skip Navigation LinksHealth Xchange > News
  News  
  Categories  
     
  Chronology  
 
  2013 2015   Dec 2015 | Nov 2015 | Oct 2015 | Sep 2015 | Aug 2015 | Jul 2015 | Jun 2015 | May 2015 | Apr 2015 | Mar 2015 | Feb 2015 | Jan 2015 |
  2013 2014   Dec 2014 | Nov 2014 | Oct 2014 | Sep 2014 | Aug 2014 | Jul 2014 | Jun 2014 | May 2014 | Apr 2014 | Mar 2014 | Feb 2014 | Jan 2014 |
  2013   Dec 2013 | Nov 2013 | Oct 2013 | Sep 2013 | Aug 2013 | Jul 2013 | Jun 2013 | May 2013 | Apr 2013 | Mar 2013 | Feb 2013 | Jan 2013 |
  2012   Dec 2012 | Nov 2012 | Oct 2012 | Sep 2012 | Aug 2012 | Jul 2012Jun 2012May 2012Apr 2012Mar 2012 | Feb 2012 | Jan 2012 |
  2011   Dec 2011Nov 2011Oct 2011 | Sep 2011 | Aug 2011Jul 2011Jun 2011 | May 2011 | Apr 2011 | Mar 2011 | Feb 2011 | Jan 2011 |
  2010   Dec 2010 | Nov 2010 | Oct 2010 | Sep 2010 | Aug 2010 | Jul 2010 | Jun 2010 | May 2010 | Apr 2010 | Mar 2010 | Feb 2010 | Jan 2010 |
  2009   Dec 2009 | Nov 2009 | Oct 2009 | Sep 2009 | Aug 2009 |
 
     
  Topic  
 
  Health Policy and Announcements | Diseases and Outbreaks
  Medical Research | New Treatments and Technology
   
 
     
  RSS  
 
  Singapore   SingHealth | Health Promotion Board | Ministry of Health | Asiaone
  International   World Health Organization | Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
       
 
     
  News Article  
 

Managing legal uncertainty in sperm donation

 
  Thursday, 02 l 12 l 2010 Source:  The Straits Times   
By: Andy Ho
     
 

sperm-donationIN THE fuss over the recent mix-up of sperm used to create a test-tube baby at a private hospital here, the rights and responsibilities of the inadvertent sperm donor were largely passed over. There are now three sperm banks – one each at the Singapore General Hospital (SGH), National University Hospital and KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital. All private fertility clinics source the sperm they need from these banks.

However, the SGH bank, which began  operations in 1988, has had just eight donors in the last five years. The situation at the two other banks is just as bad. One expert reckons that there are eight recipients for every donor available. A reason so few men donate may be the lack of a clear law about donor rights and responsibilities. In fact, given the great variety of artificial reproductive technologies (ART) – the simplest being artificial insemination using donor sperm – a comprehensive parentage law is needed.

These technologies lead to diverse combinations of parentage – surrogacy can lead to at least three parents, say – but the law has not kept up with this. As a result, the legal status of a child conceived using any type of ART remains uncertain. The statutes involved include the Women’s Charter, Adoption of Children Act, Inheritance (Family Provision) Act, Guardianship of Infants Act, and the Legitimacy Act. Yet the terms “infant”, “child”, “legitimate” or “illegitimate” are never defined in any of these laws. Neither is “father” defined except in the Adoption of Children Act, which states that “‘father’ in relation to an illegitimate infant, means the natural father; ‘parent’, in relation to an illegitimate infant, does not include the natural father”.

According to Section 114 of the Evidence Act, however, the legal husband is always the legal father of the child. The only exception is if he had “no access” to his wife at the time of conception. This law, entitled “Birth during marriage conclusive proof of legitimacy”, asserts that unless sexual intercourse was impossible between the parties – the husband being overseas, say – it “shall be conclusive proof that he is the legitimate son of that man”.

This particular law defines “conclusive proof” as meaning that the court “shall not allow evidence to be given for the purpose of disproving it”. So DNA evidence cannot be used to disprove paternity during a valid marriage (or for 280 days after its dissolution). Not even a dark child being born to a light-skinned couple can rebut that paternity. Note, however, that if “no access” is indeed proven, a child conceived using donor sperm would not be the husband’s child – although the Women’s Charter requires that a man must provide maintenance for such a child if he has accepted it as a member of his family.

Since artificial insemination using donor sperm is permitted only for a married woman whose husband consents to it, the child thus conceived and born is likely to be accepted by the husband as a family member. In the usual case then, a sperm donor has no paternity rights or responsibilities. But what if the spouses separate before the child is born? Under the Charter, “any person who is a guardian or hasthe actual custody of the child” can ask the (undefined) parent for support. Can the mother taking care of the child now sue the sperm donor as biological father for maintenance of the child?

One might counter that anonymity is assured for sperm donors. Recipients also want that anonymity preserved, so they can bring the child up as their own. But things can change. In 1990, Britain passed its Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act to regulate ART. Just 15 years later, it amended that law to remove sperm donor anonymity. This was so that children thus conceived may, upon reaching 18, petition to identify their biological fathers.

Locally, an adopted child already has a right to know the truth of his parentage under specific conditions. A child conceived using donor sperm could argue for the same qualified right by analogy. Thus, for example, the child conceived as a result of a sperm mix-up could try to seek a court order to have the fertility clinic disclose donor identity. The reason for doing so may not be frivolous: In some instances, identifying the donor can give the child a more complete medical history, especially about inheritable genetic conditions.

Conceivably, at least two types of court proceedings – those for maintenance or medical necessity – may compel donor identity disclosure. While the man in the street may not be aware of these issues, he is likely to be worried about the possibility of becoming legally obligated to some child fathered using his donated sperm.

Clearly, a comprehensive parentage law to definitively establish the rights and responsibilities of donor, recipient, and child is needed. It might allow donors to opt for or out of all paternity rights and responsibilities, to which the recipient must also agree before using the sperm. Such a law might also allow the child access to donor identity under strictly defined (medical) circumstances. When these concerns are clearly laid out, more might be willing to donate the sperm that many infertile couples need.

     
 Ask the Specialists (1st - 30th Nov)
     
Gastric Pain, what can I do?
Your Gastric Pain could be a signal of a more serious condition that needs attention; or that you need a change in lifestyle. Ask our Specialist now!
     
  Your eye and contact lenses
Concerned with the side effects of wearing contact lens? Need a guide on how to take care of your eyes and lenses? Ask our Specialist now!
     
 
 Ask the Specialists - Answered Topics
             
  Aesthetic Eye   Asthma  
  Breast Cancer   Cancer and Nutrition  
  Child's Eye Conditions   Depression  
  Breast Cancer   Eczema  
  Elderly Eye Conditions   Health At Work  
  Heart Disease   LASIK  
  Low Back Pain   Maternal Depression  
  Money and Healthcare   Managing Pain  
  Pre-pregnancy   Prostate Problem  
  Risk of Heart Disease   Sleep  
  Sports Injuries   Thyroid Problems  
  Weight Management        
             
 
 Catch up with Health Xchange
 
  facebook   newsletter  
 
  twitter