A Critical response to the Article “Are you a Sperm Donor?”

By Fr Pascal Mwambi Mwakio,*
This is a reaction to the Saturday magazine in one of the Kenyan local dailies story, “are you a sperm donor? from the website www.nation.co.ke (posted Friday, April 22, 2011 at 18:00). Sperm banks (from anonymous donors) are widely known for artificial insemination/fertilization purposes through the in vitro fertilization. This is mainly for women or men (married) with pathologies regarding their reproductive system.
When donation of sperms come from the husband of the same marriage, then this is referred to as homologous artificial fertilization (artificial insemination by husband AIH), but when the male gametes come from a different man apart from the husband, this is called heterologous artificial fertilization (artificial insemination by donor (AID). The legal, ethical and moral issues involved are enormous in case of AID.
Morally, these techniques are illicit and immoral whereby they involve substitution of the conjugal act (sexual relationship) of the couples; lack of respect to the conceived lives (normally more embryos are ‘created’ at the same time); lack of dignity in the manipulation of lives conceived; loss of lives and separation between the sexual union and procreation of children in case of fertilization in the test tube (in vitro fertilization).
The story of Marion, (probably a pseudo name), as used in the article, portrays lack of seriousness in these complicated issues. The use of sperm donation for purposes of beauty and attractiveness, through genetic selection is a setback and not really a progress. It takes us back to the Nazism era whereby discrimination of some human beings was practiced.
It is lack of fidelity in marriage for a married woman to prey for other man’s sperms other than their husbands for whatever reason at all. Physical beauty or attraction is accidental to the dignity of human beings. It may reduce some chances of recognition, for instance in beauty contests or models, but it does not diminish somebody’s dignity and respect. It is unfortunate to associate these traits with success and failure or with worthiness of a child.
It seems a contradiction (except for adoption and marriages whereby children fathered by other man existed before) to want to have a husband who is not the father of your children. A wife/husband who really loves her/his married partner cannot lie or ‘fake’ pregnancy with another person.
Rather than aesthetic reasons, the story of Marion seems driven by infidelity. She did not disclose or agree with her husband about the heterologous fertilization, although consent does not approve this case. She kept it secret to herself and I believe still secret to her children. Legal complications will arise eventually pertaining paternity and progeny.
The child born out of such a situation would have two fathers, a biological (the sperm donor) and a social one (the husband of Marion). The child will be a legitimate son/daughter to the mother, but not to the husband. This means that the child can have disclaimer rights (to disown) to the social father and claim progeny to the biological father. The social father can also disown the children not born legally from their marriage. Legitimate children are those born out of a valid marriage; born by a married woman; conceived by action of husband and in stability of marriage. In the case of sperm donation by a (known or anonymous) donor, conception is not by husband’s action. Children born out of heterologous fertilization and those involving selection of traits, are prone to Psychological problems. The psychosocial integrity of the child is not respected when another man donates the sperm.
The question asked by the child may be why this happened. This child becomes a ‘product’ of somebody else’s choice. “I am attractive or beautiful because mum wanted me this way”. How will these ‘attractive children’ view those considered as not attractive? Marion calls her husband ‘plain’ because he lacks these traits. All this leads to a form of discrimination and lack of respect to persons lacking the character traits we desire. We should learn to accept others as they are, and not for how they appear.
If Marion would still love unattractive children born from the sperm donor, just in case the attractive traits were not transmitted, then why can’t she accept children by her husband who was not good looking? It seems there are other reasons for preying sperm donors. Marion’s husband does not seem to have any problem with fertility. If she did not use in vitro fertilization, normally used for such cases, then she committed and sought adultery willingly with the sperm donor.
Thanks to biomedical technology, there is a possibility of proving biological parents of a particular child. Marion imagines that the possibilities of her husband finding out the really father of his children are nil. It would not be unwise for parents who doubt their partner’s fidelity to go for DNA test to prove who the biological parent of the children is. Days are long gone for the Latin phrase mater semper certa est, pater numquam, meaning that the mother is always certain, but never the father (is more difficult to prove).
DNA test has come in handy. This however, may not be a very good approach since it may create more disunity than unity where mere doubts exist. The presumption of law that the father of a child born during marriage is the husband of the wife may need to be reviewed. Men should be careful about women who are out to exploit them to donate their gametes for selfish and eugenic reasons.
The sperm donor story shows lack of serious commitment to marriage, an institution designed by the creator Himself. This mentality can lead young mature boys, for economic gains, to sell their sperms to women who are in search of male gametes or to sperm banks.
Marriage is a covenantal relationship between a male and a female, geared towards procreation of children. Children in marriage are a fruit of the union between the husband and wife. Children have a right to be born out of matrimony where both the husband and wife have paternal (and maternal) project. This ought to be respected. I hope that not all who read the article presented by Marion will take her serious and that they will defend their fidelity in marriage welcoming and respecting children, no matter their physical characteristics, as a gift from God, with same dignity as any other child. Artificial insemination by donor remains therefore substitutive of the proper subject the husband, in the conjugal act.
*Fr Pascal Mwambi Mwakio is a catholic priest from Mombasa Archdiocese, Kenya. He is currently a student of masters in bioethics at Regina Apostolorum University, Rome-Italy.