Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Creating a sperm or egg from any cell?

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 102 posts

Re: Creating a sperm or egg from any cell?

#41

Post by Teever »

troad wrote: post #38
runsWphotons wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most surrogates are not selfless--- they get paid for what they do...in the US often $60,000. Some jurisdictions do require that women choosing surrogacy have to do it altruistically, receiving only reimbursement for medical expenses. This causes a shortage of surrogates compared to market demand. People looking for surrogates often then travel to jurisdictions where the laws are different to obtain them (I know peop…

> Poorly regulated markets exist and pose similar issues. Right, but this sort of applies to anything though. Labour markets, for example. Does the fact that Bangladeshi clothes factories are exploitative of their staff make hiring staff intrinsically immoral in the United States? > Most surrogates are not selfless--- they get paid for what they do...in the US often $60,000. Including the lead-up and recovery period…

Soon to be an outdated discussion: https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-humanities/2020/03/03/ectogene...

Re: Creating a sperm or egg from any cell?

#42

Post by troad »

contrl wrote: post #40
troad wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what you expect to achieve by calling those selfless women who choose to do surrogacy prostitutes. The surrogacy sector in the United States is highly regulated, and surrogates are highly protected ( https://health.ny.gov/community/pregnancy/surrogacy/surrogat... ). Yours is an ignorant, misogynistic stance.

Being critical of the surrogacy industry treating women like cattle means that I'm misogynistic? What sort of logic led you to that conclusion? As for the harms of surrogacy, here's a good article that explains what's really happening, it's not the rosy picture you're painting: https://thecritic.co.uk/end-womb-trafficking

A) Denying the agency of women to make their own choices is by definition misogynistic. Asserting that when women make choices you don't agree with, it must be due to exploitation, is likewise misogynistic. Paternalistic too. Hardly the vocab of women's lib.

B) Somehow I doubt I'll be getting a particularly balanced take from a website called 'the critic slash end womb trafficking'. Julie Bindel is a fiery political opinion columnist - the Ann Coulter of radical feminism - and the article you link is brazenly polemical. I could respond with my own polemical links which counter yours, but I honestly don't see what the point of that exchange would be. It sounds like surrogacy is a culture war issue for you, which is sad, because the culture war is a parasite on good intentions.

Here are the legal protections for surrogates in the state of New York: https://health.ny.gov/community/pregnancy/surrogacy/surrogat....

Re: Creating a sperm or egg from any cell?

#43

Post by bsaul »

atleastoptimal wrote: post #10
runsWphotons wrote: post #3

Imagine how many brad pitt babies

Imagine being one of the few natural born kids starting school in 2046. Half your class is named Chris because they are literally the clones of Chris Pratt/Pine/Hemsworth/Evans. It may seem impressive, but they really are only the generic bargain bin option for genetic engineering by then. The other half, the richer kids, are hyperintelligent chimeras of every most famous, intelligent, world class athlete, celebrity…

I keep talking to people about that scenario, of basically adopting the reproductive model of racing horses for humans, but it seems that nobody realizes how far we’ve already gone in that direction.

Re: Creating a sperm or egg from any cell?

#44

Post by seba_dos1 »

gnicholas wrote: post #4

> People could even potentially steal the DNA of celebrities from, for example, a clipping of their hair to make babies, he says. "One law we definitely need is to make sure people can't become genetic parents without their knowledge or consent," says Greely. A new type of blackmail: (1) get some trace DNA from a rich person, (2) use it to create a baby, and (3) threaten to harm that baby if the rich person does not…

Why would I care about such baby being harmed any more than any other random baby being harmed? I'd probably notify authorities that there's some baby likely being harmed and be done with it.

The only reason to care is that the current laws would consider such baby mine. I wouldn't. In such reality, these laws would have to be adjusted.

Re: Creating a sperm or egg from any cell?

#45

Post by runsWphotons »

Teever wrote: post #41
troad wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Poorly regulated markets exist and pose similar issues. Right, but this sort of applies to anything though. Labour markets, for example. Does the fact that Bangladeshi clothes factories are exploitative of their staff make hiring staff intrinsically immoral in the United States? > Most surrogates are not selfless--- they get paid for what they do...in the US often $60,000. Including the lead-up and recovery period…

Soon to be an outdated discussion: https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-humanities/2020/03/03/ectogene...

"The last several years have seen significant progress toward the development of an artificial womb which would facilitate the survival and growth of prematurely born fetuses from approximately 23-24 weeks gestation onward."

Seems a long way from eliminating the need for surrogacy.

Re: Creating a sperm or egg from any cell?

#46

Post by contrl »

troad wrote: post #42
contrl wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being critical of the surrogacy industry treating women like cattle means that I'm misogynistic? What sort of logic led you to that conclusion? As for the harms of surrogacy, here's a good article that explains what's really happening, it's not the rosy picture you're painting: https://thecritic.co.uk/end-womb-trafficking

A) Denying the agency of women to make their own choices is by definition misogynistic. Asserting that when women make choices you don't agree with, it must be due to exploitation, is likewise misogynistic. Paternalistic too. Hardly the vocab of women's lib. B) Somehow I doubt I'll be getting a particularly balanced take from a website called 'the critic slash end womb trafficking'. Julie Bindel is a fiery political…

Your definition of misogyny is far too narrow then, if you're focusing entirely on the concept of individual agency, yet ignoring the larger structural inequalities and power dynamics that constrain women's choices and perpetuate exploitation.

Did you actually read the article I linked, or are you just complaining about the URL? If you did read it, do you dispute the factual content that describes several examples of exploitation of women in the surrogacy industry?

Complaining that a woman has a strong opinion is a rather odd criticism, Julie Bindel has been actively researching surrogacy and its harms for many, many years now and it would be very surprising if she wasn't opinionated on this topic.

Just because there are some regulations in place doesn't mean that exploitation doesn't occur. The fact remains that surrogacy often involves financial transactions where women's bodies are being used as a means to an end. It is not at all misogynistic to critically examine this.

Re: Creating a sperm or egg from any cell?

#47

Post by sjducb »

solatic wrote: post #14

> "One law we definitely need is to make sure people can't become genetic parents without their knowledge or consent," says Greely. Exactly when and how is consent given? Going down this ethical train of thought, one could argue that sexual intercourse only implies consent for sexual intercourse, not consent for reproduction. If the requirement for consent implies a requirement for a written contract, then consent fo…

Sex is not separate from reproduction. If you are a man and have sex with a woman then you're consenting to be a father.

Most western countries recognize verbal and other non-written contracts. The clearest example I can see here is the UK's law about weather the genetic father is the legal father. If the child was conceived through sexual intercourse then the genetic father is always the legal father.

Re: Creating a sperm or egg from any cell?

#48

Post by samtho »

Wiki39366 wrote: post #30
samtho wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This just does not happen if the donation was done with the correct contracts and paperwork. Gamete donation has been a multi billion dollar industry for many years would not exist if those donors, anonymous or otherwise, suddenly would be at risk of paying child support for anywhere from 3 to 300 children.

[flagged]

> And court can easily decide that you are no longer "anonymous donor", because you "accepted paternal role", by giving money, by paying for dinner or even by answering messages! There are precedents for that!

The only precedent I’ve found for this is a few homophobic judges that wanted an excuse to pull the sperm-donor father into a child’s life despite having one (single mother by choice) or two women parents that found a donor informally on a Facebook group or something similar.

I am very entrenched in the world of gamete donation being the product of one and I’ve never heard of, run across, or even read someone’s story of this happening to parent(s) who go through a clinic or take legal steps with a “direct to consumer” sperm donation.

Re: Creating a sperm or egg from any cell?

#49

Post by troad »

contrl wrote: post #46
troad wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A) Denying the agency of women to make their own choices is by definition misogynistic. Asserting that when women make choices you don't agree with, it must be due to exploitation, is likewise misogynistic. Paternalistic too. Hardly the vocab of women's lib. B) Somehow I doubt I'll be getting a particularly balanced take from a website called 'the critic slash end womb trafficking'. Julie Bindel is a fiery political…

Your definition of misogyny is far too narrow then, if you're focusing entirely on the concept of individual agency, yet ignoring the larger structural inequalities and power dynamics that constrain women's choices and perpetuate exploitation. Did you actually read the article I linked, or are you just complaining about the URL? If you did read it, do you dispute the factual content that describes several examples of…

> Your definition of misogyny is far too narrow then, if you're focusing entirely on the concept of individual agency, yet ignoring the larger structural inequalities and power dynamics that constrain women's choices and perpetuate exploitation.

There's a long history of imagined threats being used to take away people's rights. At the end of the day, you're saying that you know better than individual women what is best for them, and implying that you wish to take away their right to choose in ways that are inconsistent with your views. It's the pro-life argument, just in a different context.

> Just because there are some regulations in place doesn't mean that exploitation doesn't occur. The fact remains that surrogacy often involves financial transactions where women's bodies are being used as a means to an end. It is not at all misogynistic to critically examine this.

The problem with your argument is that there's ample evidence of successful surrogacies, with all sides walking away very happy. Your argument rests on some tortured process of explaining to people that no, they're actually super unhappy, they just don't know it. Which is nuts. Anecdotes from third world countries without adequate legal protections for surrogates are only useful for making the point that we need strong legal protections for surrogates, which I totally agree with.

Ultimately, I do believe you're coming from a good place. I disagree though, profoundly, that banning surrogacy will in any way elevate or protect women. It will not. It will mostly harm same-sex and infertile couples. Many of which contain women. (It will also lead to many, many instances of people choosing to be surrogates anyway, except with no legal protection or framework.)

Re: Creating a sperm or egg from any cell?

#50

Post by samtho »

sjducb wrote: post #47
solatic wrote: post #14

> "One law we definitely need is to make sure people can't become genetic parents without their knowledge or consent," says Greely. Exactly when and how is consent given? Going down this ethical train of thought, one could argue that sexual intercourse only implies consent for sexual intercourse, not consent for reproduction. If the requirement for consent implies a requirement for a written contract, then consent fo…

Sex is not separate from reproduction. If you are a man and have sex with a woman then you're consenting to be a father. Most western countries recognize verbal and other non-written contracts. The clearest example I can see here is the UK's law about weather the genetic father is the legal father. If the child was conceived through sexual intercourse then the genetic father is always the legal father.

Sex has been separated from reproduction, at least in the few species we know of that partake in it for pleasure only. Humans engage in a variety of sexual activities that ostensibly cannot result in a pregnancy.

You talk about verbal contracts, how is that different from misrepresenting yourself if you said you were on the pill or you had a vasectomy? The verbal contract of consent can be delivered or revoked during this stage as well.

Post reply on HN