In CWR
“Egg or sperm donors don’t help other people have children,
they help other people have their children,” says Jennifer Lahl,
founder and president of the Center for
Bioethics and Culture.
Lahl spoke with Catholic World Report about her work to
assist the most defenseless affected by the rapidly changing and largely
unregulated world of biotechnology.
The CBC has produced three original, award-winning
documentary films: Anonymous
Father’s Day (2011), about children of sperm donors who long to know
more about their biological fathers; Eggsploitation (2010), which
uncovers the serious risks associated with human egg donation; and Lines That Divide (2009),
focusing upon the stem-cell research debate.
CWR: Your work at the Center for Bioethics
and Culture tries to help the most vulnerable affected by biotechnology. Other
than, say, “spare embryos” from IVF, who else are you looking to assist?
Lahl: Our work focuses on end-of-life
issues, like euthanasia, and “making life” issues via assisted reproductive
technologies. The most vulnerable we seek to give a voice to are those facing
terminal illness, disabilities, [the] suffering (those society says have a life
not worth living), and also the stakeholders in assisted reproductive technology
(ART), e.g., egg donors, surrogate mothers, and the children created by these
technologies.
Of course, we do advocate against sperm donation too, and it
may be a stretch to say a sperm donor is vulnerable, but we seek to educate them
on the realities of donor conception. I often say to egg donors (and it could
be said of sperm donation), you didn’t help a woman (or a couple or man) have a
baby, you helped her have your baby.
CWR: The intense emotional desire to be a
parent is the main motivation behind surrogacy and technologies like IVF. Your
work, however, especially your films, focuses on different sets of emotions
beyond those of potential parents. Tell us about those.
Lahl: Our films are feature-length (versus
shorts), partly because the complexities we lay out require more than your
typical short film. What is really lacking in the discussions of ART [that deal
with] with infertile couples (or even couples/individuals who use third-party
reproductive technologies) is a fully orbed discussion of ALL the stakeholders.
Buyer and sellers. Donors and recipients and, of course, the children.
My background is nursing. I worked for over 20 years in
nursing, primarily in pediatrics. I understand the realities of the medical
risks and procedures to women and children. I read the data about these
risks—known and unknown—and also about the reality that the majority of IVF
cycles fail. I’ve taken care of preemie babies in intensive care units and seen
the harm done to children born out of multiple births. Also, I’ve met and
interviewed women seriously harmed by making the decision to “donate” their
eggs, and children, now adults, conceived by donor conception who are not
“alright,” like Hollywood purports. These stories, these voices, these facts
demand to be included in the conversation. Sadly, the industry stakeholders only
tell the happy stories of desperate couples who get children of their dreams.
CWR: As more and more people are conceived
through sperm donors or born of surrogate mothers, are there unexpected
consequences playing out in the lives of these individuals?
Lahl: I suppose one surprising thing that is
happening is they’re finding each other via social media and online forums, so
that they are building a community—working together, sharing their stories,
which validates many of their thoughts and feelings. Typically, these people are
told to be happy they were wanted. Be happy they are alive. Be thankful for
these technologies which gave them life. And, of course, they are happy to be
alive, but it’s valid and legitimate that they may not be pleased with the
method of their conception.
I remember doing our premiere screening of our film
Anonymous Father’s Day in NYC. Many of the donor-conceived people in
the film and in the social media world were on hand. While many of these people
“knew” each other via emails and Facebook, etc., it was so fun for them all to
meet each other in person, gathered around a common theme shared by them all.
CWR: What sorts of resources are there for
someone in this position who wishes to know more about his biological parent or
parents?
Lahl: DNA home-testing has really dropped
in price and become affordable for many. So, along with DNA testing and groups
like the donor sibling registry, people are making matches with biological
parents and half-siblings. As these technologies become more prevalent and
advanced, it really will be hard to keep anonymity a reality in third-party
agreements. But of course all of this testing and matching depends on the child
being told their conception story…. Many people do not tell their children they
were conceived by donor eggs or sperm.
CWR: Egg donation is on the rise, especially
since women can be paid for their eggs. Are there risks involved for the donor?
Lahl: I encourage all to watch
Eggsploitation, where we outline the short- and long-term risks of egg
donation. Naturally, any woman undergoing a surgical procedure to harvest her
eggs [faces] all those risks—bleeding, infection, risks of anesthesia, risks of
the drugs she takes to produce many eggs (egg donors typically produce upwards
of 20, 40, 60 eggs at a time).
The most serious short-term risk is Ovarian Hyperstimulation
Syndrome (OHSS), which can cause strokes, organ failure, even, in rare cases,
death. Young women (exactly the egg donor profile) are most susceptible to OHSS.
And of course, unlike the infertile woman, who is treated like a patient, the
egg donor is being paid to produce lots and lots of eggs, and is therefore more
aggressively stimulated. Long-term risks are more problematic to identify, since
we have not done the necessary studies on what I call the “healthy non-patient”
egg donor. There are cancer risks from fertility drugs. There is the risk to the
donor of lost or damaged fertility.
CWR: In general, the entire enterprise seems
to be very risky, with only 19 percent of IVF treatments being effective, but
also in terms of health and the well-being of the children created through these
technologies. Is there any regulation of the industry to make people aware of
the risks?
Lahl: Sadly, there is no regulation in place to provide
people with information about these risks. In my state of California we
attempted to pass modest legislation which would have required egg-donor ads to
have a warning label, similar to cigarettes, stating that no long-term studies
have been done on this practice. The industry stakeholders (very wealthy and
powerful) got involved and were able to gut the bill then-Governor Arnold
Schwarzenegger signed, which said if you follow the American Society for
Reproductive Medicine guidelines (which are meaningless and non-enforceable),
you are exempt from placing warning labels on your ads. Of course all the
agencies say they follow the guidelines. It shows the uphill battle we face in
protecting and fully informing women.
