Subscribe to the BioNews newsletter for free

Login
Advanced Search

Search for
BioNews

Like the Progress Educational Trust on Facebook



 

Fathers or donors? The legal position of friends who act as informal sperm donors

08 December 2008

By Natalie Gamble

Fertility law solicitor, Lester Aldridge LLP

Appeared in BioNews 487
I read with interest the article in BioNews and reply commentary from Berenice Golding about the recent Vitabiotics survey finding that over half of women would consider asking a friend to father their child. As a solicitor who has represented many single women and lesbian couples conceiving with 'friends' as donors, this is an issue I have quite a bit of practical experience dealing with.

There are many good reasons for a woman to choose to conceive with an informal donor rather than an unknown donor via a clinic. Of course, the problems with donor sperm supply are an important factor, but there are additional positive reasons. When conceiving with an informal donor, conception is free and unmedicalised, something which is often particularly attractive to single women and lesbian couples who do not have a fertility problem which needs to be treated medically. There is also the prospect of having an identifiable father around, which many feel is better for a child than being conceived with an unidentified donor they know very little about (albeit that the child will now be able to contact him at age 18).

Legally, however, the issues are immensely complex. Most people think that a donor's legal status hinges entirely on the place of conception: if a licensed clinic, he has no responsibilities as a parent; if at home, the law does not protect him. In fact, the law on informal donation is much more complicated. The first question in assessing the legal status of an informal donor is not where the conception takes place, but who he is donating to.

If a known donor donates to a married couple, he usually has no status as the legal father, even if the conception takes place entirely informally at home. This is because the law says that where a married couple conceives by donor insemination (DI) and the husband consents, the husband 'and no other person' is the legal father of the child. There is no requirement in the law for the insemination to take place at a licensed clinic, and so provided that the child is not conceived through sexual intercourse, the donor will not be a legal parent.

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 will introduce similar rules for civil partners. For children conceived after April 2009, this means that the non-birth mother in a lesbian civil partnership will be the child's second parent, leaving the biological father with no legal rights or financial responsibilities. Again, this will apply to all DI conceptions, including those which take place informally at home.

In cases of home donation to married couples/civil partners, the dividing line which determines whether the donor or the husband/civil partner is the second legal parent is therefore the means of conception. In practice, if a dispute arises later on, it may be difficult to prove that conception did occur by DI rather than sexual intercourse, so I always advise couples and donors entering into these arrangements to sign formally witnessed legal statements to confirm the circumstances of conception, making it very difficult for either party to later allege something different.

In all other cases, informal donation at home does mean that the donor is the legal father of the child. In particular, where an unmarried couple or a single woman conceives by DI at home using a friend's sperm, the donor will be the child's legal father.

There are various implications. First, it means that the donor is financially responsible for the child just like any other natural father. The Child Support Agency (if asked by the mother or where the mother is on means-tested state benefits) can pursue him for maintenance. I acted last year for Andy Bathie, the fireman sperm donor whose case hit the headlines after he was pursued for maintenance for the two children conceived by a lesbian couple with his informally-donated sperm. I know all too well that, in the absence of evidence of treatment at a licensed clinic, the CSA have little sympathy for biological fathers who claim they were 'just acting as a donor'.

Secondly, status as the legal father means that the donor can seek involvement in the child's upbringing, just like any other natural father. In common with other unmarried fathers, the donor will only have 'parental responsibility' (the right to be actively involved in day to day decision making about the child's upbringing) if he is named on the birth certificate. Current law says the mother is entirely free to decide whether to name him, so the best advice for those conceiving with informal donors is clearly not to do so. Berenice Golding commented on the proposals by the government to introduce compulsion to name unmarried fathers on birth certificates. This proposal is very much in the early stages of discussion but, if introduced, could mean a fine for single women who refuse to name an informal donor.

Even if the mother does not name the donor, his status as father is not removed. Even if he has no parental responsibility, being the legal father means that he can apply to the court for this at any time, and he can seek other court orders, including a right to regular contact, a right to be consulted on certain issues, or a right to stop the mother moving away. In making any decision in this vein, a court must weigh up the situation as a whole in the child's best interests, so his rights are not guaranteed. However, there is clearly potential for long, difficult legal battles; I have advised parents whose lives have been made a misery as a result.

So what can be done to overcome these difficulties?

Having a written agreement is a very good idea. Such an agreement is not legally enforceable in the way that a commercial contract would be but, if a dispute arises between the parties, it acts as strong evidence about the context of the situation. I suspect the courts will give such agreements greater weight as more of these cases arise.

Perhaps more importantly, existing case law (and my own experience) demonstrates that disputes arise most commonly where there is a mismatch of expectations between the mother and the donor at the outset: the donor perhaps envisages regular involvement but the mother sees him as a more distant 'uncle' figure. The process of discussing in detail how the relationship will be managed in order to draft an agreement helps flush out any such issues, and so reduces the risk of a dispute arising. I have advised clients who, after realising that they in fact had quite different expectations, decided to walk away from the arrangement and pursue other options. Much better for any problems to be discovered at this early stage, rather than after a child was born.

Another option that potentially gives much better legal protection is for the woman to take her known donor 'friend' to a licensed clinic and to register him as a sperm donor (normally on the basis that he only donates to her). This is likely to exclude his legal status as the father, but care still needs to be taken. Many women - and clinicians - assume that the donor signing consent to be treated as a donor acts as a guarantee that he has no status as the father. In fact, when conceiving with a single woman, the donor could still be treated as the legal father of the child if he intends any kind of co-parenting role. Since most women conceiving with known donors choose to do so because they want the father to have some degree of involvement, the legal position of the donor is a complicated question. There are steps which can be taken to secure the position, but specialist legal advice in all such cases is essential.

Known donor conception is undoubtedly on the increase, driven by the donor sperm shortage and the increasing numbers of single women prepared to go it alone as parents. Having advised on many such arrangements, I have seen the good and the bad. At one end of the spectrum I have seen such mothers happily and effectively raising children with varying degrees of donor involvement. At the other, I have seen bitter legal disputes between mothers and donors where one side or the other ends up wishing that they had never entered into an informal arrangement. The key message is that it is crucial for those involved to be clear about the legal situation they are getting into, so that they make the right choice with their eyes wide open.

For more information, please visit website.

 

SOURCES & REFERENCES

RELATED ARTICLES FROM THE BIONEWS ARCHIVE

22 October 2012 - by Maria Sheppard 
A man in Queensland, Australia, who acted as a known sperm donor for a woman in what appeared to be a private arrangement, has been awarded shared parental responsibility over a girl he fathered...
25 June 2012 - by Rose Palmer 
Two children of a lesbian couple are due to receive £70,000 compensation from the NHS after a mistake led to the death of their sperm donor father. The man was also the nephew of one of the women...
12 December 2009 - by Ben Jones 
The Irish Supreme Court has ruled that a 42-year old man should have access to a lesbian couple's son who was conceived using his donated sperm. The highest court in Ireland ruled that the man has 'natural rights' over the son and that while he should not be entitled to guardianship over the boy it is in the child's best interests for the father to be granted contact....
06 July 2009 - by Antony Blackburn-Starza 
An acute shortage of donor sperm is diminishing the capacity of the UK's public and private health sectors to treat infertility, resulting in growing concern and lengthening waiting lists at clinics. The shortage is widely attributed to the removal, in 2005, of entitlement to donor anonymity. The Progress Educational Trust, with support from the Royal Society of Medicine and the British Fertility Society (BFS) staged a panel discussion on Thursday 25 June 2009 entitled 'Banking Crisis - what ...
31 October 2008 - by Dr Berenice Golding 
Commenting on the recent article in BioNews, which reported that half of women would ask a friend to father their child if they had no partner (1), I wish to raise the following points for consideration. The Vitabiotics survey this was based on reported that over half of the women...

31 October 2008 - by Dr Berenice Golding 
Commenting on the recent article in BioNews, which reported that half of women would ask a friend to father their child if they had no partner (1), I wish to raise the following points for consideration. The Vitabiotics survey this was based on reported that over half of the women...
22 September 2008 - by Katy Sinclair 
A survey of 3,103 men and women, conducted by vitamin supplement company Vitabiotics, has found that 45 per cent of women surveyed would consider asking a male friend to father their child in the absence of a suitable partner. The report by the company reveals that both...

HAVE YOUR SAY
Be the first to have your say.

You need to or  to add comments.

By posting a comment you agree to abide by the BioNews terms and conditions


- click here to enquire about using this story.

Published by the Progress Educational Trust

CROSSING FRONTIERS

Public Conference
London
8 December 2017

Speakers include

Professor Azim Surani

Professor Magdalena Zernicka-Goetz

Professor Robin Lovell-Badge

Sally Cheshire

Professor Guido Pennings

Katherine Littler

Professor Allan Pacey

Dr Sue Avery

Professor Richard Anderson

Dr Elizabeth Garner

Dr Andy Greenfield

Dr Anna Smajdor

Dr Henry Malter

Vivienne Parry

Dr Helen O'Neill

Dr César Palacios-González

Philippa Taylor

Fiona Fox

Sarah Norcross

Sandy Starr


BOOK HERE

Good Fundraising Code

Become a Friend of PET HERE and give the Progress Educational Trust a regular donation