Brave New Eugenics: officially making fatherless babies

article

In full;

Britain is to get its first NHS-funded national [socialist] sperm bank to make it easier for lesbian couples and single women to have children. [DS: boys without any father at all]

For as little as £300 – less than half the cost [???] of the service at a private clinic –  they will be able to search an online database and choose an anonymous donor on the basis of his ethnicity, height, profession and even hobbies.

The bank, which is due to open in October, will then send out that donor’s sperm to a clinic of the client’s choice for use in trying for a baby. [IVF is too expensive and causes birth defects and retardation]

Heterosexual couples will also be able to benefit, but the move – funded by the Department of Health – is largely designed to meet the increasing demand from thousands of women who want to start a family without having a relationship with a man.

Critics last night called it a ‘dangerous social experiment’ that could result in hundreds of fatherless ‘designer families’.

The former Bishop of Rochester, Michael Nazir-Ali, said last night: ‘It is the welfare of the child that must come first and not the fact that people want a particular kind of baby.’ [or any baby, you don’t have a right to another human being, that’s called slavery]

Bishop Michael, who once chaired the ethics committee of Britain’s fertility watchdog, added: ‘This is social experimentation. It’s one thing for a child not to have a mother or father through tragedy, but it is another to plan children to come into the world without a father.’ [who wants to tell the Children’s Rights people?]

The National Sperm Bank will be based at Birmingham Women’s NHS Foundation Trust, which currently runs an existing NHS fertility clinic and recruits sperm donors from the local population. [who are liable for 18 years of Child Support payments]

Funded by a £77,000 Government grant, the bank will be run by the National Gamete Donation Trust (NGDT) which this year received  an additional £120,000 of public money to organise egg and sperm donation.

Over the next three years the NGDT aims to recruit at least 1,000 men and collect sufficient  donations for the sperm bank to meet demand.

Laura Witjens, NGDT chief executive, said: ‘There are people who  are medically infertile or practically infertile [you mean they can’t have children because of their lifestyle choices, their choices] – they want to use donation services in the UK but can’t do so because there isn’t enough donated sperm. [blame Child Support laws]

‘The demand from same-sex couples and single women has grown exponentially. It’s become more socially acceptable to say, I haven’t found a guy yet, don’t want to wait for him, still want a child.’

She added: ‘The aim is that we will have enough surplus sperm so that we will be able to set up a service for people like single women and same-sex couples.’

She described this group as ‘customers rather than patients’. [Then they can fucking pay for private.]

Britain has a major shortage of sperm donors, whose anonymity is preserved until any children they father reach the age of 18. [not really, the kid can track them down – Facebook? Google?]

Women who want to have a baby using donated sperm have been routinely waiting for up to two years, with many eventually forced to seek donors abroad. [what a shame]

Treatment resulted in the births of 161 babies to lesbian couples.

Ms Witjens rejected suggestions that children suffer adverse consequences from lacking a father figure. [abuse charges?] ‘There is no evidence to suggest that children are better off with or without a father,’ she said. ‘There’s never been a call – from us or the Department of Health – to reduce the access to sperm for same-sex or single women. That’s a non-issue.’

Ms Witjens pointed to the removal of the reference to a ‘need for a father’ in the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act, when taking account of a child’s welfare when providing fertility treatment. [equality!]

She added that the National Sperm Bank would also help prevent desperate women using murky unregulated services and going online to buy sperm. [or save up and pay private. If they can’t save enough they can’t be good parents.]

Heterosexual couples with fertility problems who need donations as part of IVF treatment will be among the customers of the new bank.

But a large percentage are predicted to be professional, single females who decide to have a baby without a man.

And based on current trends, more than a quarter of all the recipients are likely to be gay women.

Latest available figures from the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority show that in 2011, 4,101 cycles of donor insemination were carried out in the UK.

Of these, 1,271 related to women registered with a female partner. That figure represents more than  a quarter of the total and was a  23 per cent increase from the  previous year.

There are currently just two clinics in the UK where women can choose donors from an online list.  Both are private and charge around £850 for the service.

NHS funding for fertility services, including donor insemination, is decided by regional Clinical Commissioning Groups and varies widely. [same NHS which has been refusing cancer treatments to cut costs, including to children]

CCGs are typically more likely to fund heterosexual couples struggling to conceive rather than lesbians or single women because they are considered to have more of a medical need. [duh] The NGDT hopes the sperm bank will be self-funding after a year.

A spokeswoman for the HFEA said: ‘We welcome the new National Sperm Bank which will help to ensure that the recruitment of donors and the availability of donor sperm is better organised.’

____________________________________________________________________

COMMENT: Designer babies are a disaster for society, writes Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali

This announcement raises some important questions about the future of our children and the role of men in our families  and communities.

The most important thing to say is that the needs of  any child must be primary. It is the upbringing, welfare and education of the child that should be the prior consideration. It is not enough to ‘want’ a child, let alone one with particular characteristics.

This bank will allow women to choose from profiles of donors, which will include educational attainment and ‘attractiveness’ criteria, [DISCRIMINATION!] raising the spectre of ‘designer babies’, born to the parents’ specifications. [this was predicted. Holy Shit, someone tell CH!]

What if  the process of pregnancy and birth ‘interferes’ with the desired outcomes? Will such babies then  be rejected? [yes, they already are]

Research shows that children are best brought up in families where a mum and dad are present. The role of fathers in the nurture of their children is unique and cannot be replaced by other so-called ‘male role-models’ or, indeed, an extra ‘mother’.

Research tells us that children relate to their fathers differently than to their mothers, and this is important in developing a sense of their own identity.

In particular, boys need closeness to their fathers for a sense of security and in developing their own identity, including appropriate patterns of masculine behaviour.

The results of ‘father-hunger’ can be seen in educational achievement and on our streets, where it contributes to delinquency.

None of this should detract from the heroism of single parents. They should be provided with every support by the State and by local communities.

There is, however,  a big difference between children growing up without fathers because of death or family breakdown, and actively planning to bring children into the world who will not know one of their biological parents and where such a parent will never be part of the nurture of these children. [violation of a human right, actually]

Research tells us that children relate to their fathers differently than to their mothers, and this is important in developing a sense of their own identity, writes Bishop Nazir-Ali

This also brings the question of anonymity to the fore. The change in the law, so people could, at a certain age, find out who their biological father is, has certainly contributed to the ‘shortage’ of donors in response to which the sperm bank has been set up. [and the big bill, say, for University tuition, 18+?]

If there is no anonymity, will potential donors come forward, or will the bank face these same ‘shortages’?