AI sperm donation in Charlotte, North Carolina

My wife and I have been together for 6 years and married for 2. Professional careers, stable families and tons of love to give. We have gone through fertility treatments and have been given sperm from a friend that resulted in a pregnancy but unfortunately resulted in a miscarriage. AI donations only.
Age: 29
Location: Charlotte, North Carolina, United States

Sperm donor in Brooklyn, New York


I am a 25 year old vibrant African American male. I am looking for a female that’s interested in co-parenting or a sperm donation. I have a bachelors degree and I’m close to finishing my masters. I can support a child or never make contact if that’s what you choose. We can work out the logistics upon contact.

Age: 25
Location: Brooklyn/New York, New York, United States

Donation Review Decisions from HFEA – leading introductory service for sperm donors.

The UK’s fertility regulator, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), has made its first set of decisions following the outcome of its recent consultation on sperm and egg donation, known as the Donation Review. Having analysed responses to the Donation Review, HFEA staff asked HFEA members to approve a series of recommendations at a meeting on 13 July. All of these recommendations were ultimately approved, but in several instances the decision had to be put to a vote and there was a dissenting minority. Additionally, the wording of some of the recommendations was amended during the course of the discussion.

The most straightforward decision made by the HFEA was that the maximum number of families which a sperm or egg donor is permitted to create should not be changed, and that the current maximum limit of 10 should remain. The HFEA also resolved to take steps to encourage clinics to make optimum use of the donor sperm already available, because there is currently a disparity between the maximum number of families that that an individual donor is permitted to create and the number of families that are actually being created from the sperm of individual donors. (The precise size of and reasons for this disparity are disputed).

The HFEA also decided to issue guidance stating that sperm and eggs should not be mixed if they come from very close genetic relatives (for example, brother and sister or father and daughter). If such mixing took place in vitro then this would not technically fall afoul of the UK’s legal prohibition on incest. Such mixing is never known to have occurred, but the HFEA decided it was appropriate to issue specific guidance on the matter at this time.

The mixing of sperm and eggs of close relatives is a very different matter from the replacement of someone’s sperm or eggs with sperm or eggs donated by a close relative (for instance, a man’s wife being fertilised with his brother’s sperm, or a woman becoming pregnant with a child conceived using an egg donated by the woman’s mother). It was decided that this sort of replacement of sperm or eggs within families should remain permitted, but that ‘best practice’ in this area should be formulated by the HFEA, in collaboration with professionals and interest groups. It was also decided that clinics should be required to submit data about this sort of donation to the HFEA, so that its prevalence can be established.

Finally, the HFEA considered whether donors should be permitted to place conditions on the use of their sperm and eggs, and if so, then what sorts of conditionality should be permitted. For example, should a sperm donor be permitted to specify that their sperm cannot be used (or alternatively, can only be used) to treat a lesbian, or a single woman, or a woman of a particular ethnicity, religion or age? This is an area where two different parts of UK law (fertility legislation and equalities legislation) are potentially in conflict with one another, and therefore it poses a difficult problem for the HFEA.

The HFEA eventually decided to permit the placing of conditions, but to issue guidance qualifying this permission according to different contexts. This decision was made despite vocal dissension from some members, who wanted the placing of conditions to be prohibited apart from in exceptional circumstances.

The HFEA will make a further set of decisions based on the outcome of the Donation Review later this year. This next set of decisions will concern how much and what sort of compensation (financial and otherwise) sperm and egg donors should be permitted to receive for their donation.



Sperm donor in Australia fights for his child

For Sperm Donors in Australia visit

He was so excited about the impending birth of his child 10 years ago he discussed building a home in the Blue Mountains for himself and the lesbian couple who had used his donated sperm to conceive.

The man, who can only be known by court order as BB, said they agreed he should be involved in his daughter’s life but exactly how was never decided.

After answering the couple’s advertisment in a magazine, BB said he provided sperm to the birth mother, paid $5000 for her fertility treatments at an Eastern suburbs clinic and paid for the midwife who managed the home birth of their daughter in 2001.

He had also agreed to father a child with the woman’s then partner, who can only be known as AA, but that failed. The two women separated in 2008.

Ten years on, after a tumultuous relationship among the three parents, the woman’s ex-partner, AA, is taking the NSW Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages and BB to court to have his name removed from the girl’s birth certificate.

It is the first case of its kind since the introduction of a retrospective law in 2008 giving lesbian couples equal parenting responsibilities or legal status.

Of 94,354 birth registrations last year, 117 were for children born to same-sex parents.

BB said he had gone through “10 years of hell” and spent $50,000 on legal fees.

He has seen the girl for five hours a fortnight since she was one. He paid $150 a week support for her first year, though he was not obliged to, and paid one-third of her school fees for two years.

Last year he had allowed the birth mother, listed on the birth certificate as a funeral celebrant, to stay at his  home for three months when she was unable to pay rent at her own home, he said.

The girl is the major beneficiary in his will and she calls his mother “Nan.”

He is devastated that he may be taken off the birth certificate.

“It’s a very depressing situation … the birth certificate is more than a bit of paper; it tells people who you are,” he said.

“No one seems to care about fathers these days.”

He said the three had been “all wrapped up in the moment of having the child” and were on good terms until the birth.

“I was going to build this great big house and live together … Everything was fine until the baby was born … they used me and they took my money and now they’ve got what they want, they really just didn’t want to know me.”
Both women have declined to comment.

A sperm donor does not have legal parenting responsibilities – and thus cannot make decisions about the child’s education or medical needs – even if a court grants visitation rights and he is on the birth certificate.

It is not possible under NSW law to have three parents with legal responsibilities. Had BB had sexual intercourse with the woman or married her, he would have gained that legal status.

Partners of lesbian mothers gained that right automatically with the introduction of the Miscellaneous Acts Amendment (Same Sex Relationships) Act 2008.

A family law expert, Paul Boers, said there was still confusion among gay and lesbian parents.

“I get lesbian couples concerned about whether the sperm donor might come back and seek parenting orders [to spend time with the child]. I tell them that he’s got to get over the hurdle of convincing a court that he’s concerned with the care, welfare and development of the child and he’s got an established relationship with the child.”

The case is set down for hearing on August 2.

Source: Sydney Morning Herald May 25th 2011