| Author |
Message |
zero
Rear Admiral
Joined: 03 Apr 2005
Posts: 4566
Location: Texas
|
 Thu May 05, 2005 4:29 pm FDA to Implement Gay Sperm Donor Rules |
|
| Quote: | NEW YORK - To the dismay of gay-rights activists, the
Food and Drug Administration is about to implement new rules recommending that any man who has engaged in homosexual sex in the previous five years be barred from serving as an anonymous sperm donor.
ADVERTISEMENT
The
FDA has rejected calls to scrap the provision, insisting that gay men collectively pose a higher-than-average risk of carrying the
AIDS virus. Critics accuse the FDA of stigmatizing all gay men rather than adopting a screening process that focuses on high-risk sexual behavior by any would-be donor, gay or straight.
"Under these rules, a heterosexual man who had unprotected sex with
HIV-positive prostitutes would be OK as a donor one year later, but a gay man in a monogamous, safe-sex relationship is not OK unless he's been celibate for five years," said Leland Traiman, director of a clinic in Alameda, Calif., that seeks gay sperm donors.
Traiman said adequate safety assurances can be provided by testing a sperm donor at the time of the initial donation, then freezing the sperm for a six-month quarantine and testing the donor again to be sure there is no new sign of HIV or other infectious diseases.
Although there is disagreement over whether the FDA guideline regarding gay men will have the force of law, most doctors and clinics are expected to observe it.
The practical effect of the provision � part of a broader set of cell and tissue donation regulations that take effect May 25 � is hard to gauge. It is likely to affect some lesbian couples who want a child and prefer to use a gay man's sperm for artificial insemination.
But it is the provision's symbolic aspect that particularly troubles gay-rights groups. Kevin Cathcart, executive director of Lambda Legal, has called it "policy based on bigotry."
"The part I find most offensive � and a little frightening � is that it isn't based on good science," Cathcart said. "There's a steadily increasing trend of heterosexual transmission of HIV, and yet the FDA still has this notion that you protect people by putting gay men out of the pool."
In a letter to the FDA, Lambda Legal has suggested a screening procedure based on sexual behavior, not sexual orientation. Prospective donors � gay or straight � would be rejected if they had engaged in unprotected sex in the previous 12 months with an HIV-positive person, an illegal drug user, or "an individual of unknown HIV status outside of a monogamous relationship."
But an FDA spokeswoman cited FDA documents suggesting that officials felt the broader exclusion was prudent even if it affected gay men who practice safe sex.
"The FDA is very much aware that strict exclusion policies eliminate some safe donors," said one document.
Many doctors and fertility clinics already have been rejecting gay sperm donors, citing the pending FDA rules or existing regulations of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine.
"With an anonymous sperm donor, you can't be too careful," said a society spokeswoman, Eleanor Nicoll. "Our concern is for the health of the recipient, not to let more and more people be sperm donors."
However, some sperm banks, notably in California, have welcomed gay donors. The director of one of them, Alice Ruby of the Oakland-based Sperm Bank of California, said her staff had developed procedures for identifying gay men with an acceptably low risk of HIV.
Gay men are a major donor source at Traiman's Rainbow Flag sperm bank, and he said that practice would continue despite the new rules.
"We're going to continue to follow judicious, careful testing procedures for our clients that even experts within the FDA say is safe," said Traiman, referring to the six-month quarantine.
The FDA rules do not prohibit gay men from serving as "directed" sperm donors. If a woman wishing to become pregnant knows a gay man and asks that he provide sperm for artificial insemination, a clinic could provide that service even if the man had engaged in sex with other men within five years.
However, Traiman said some lesbian couples do not have a gay friend they know and trust well enough to be the biological father of their child, and would thus prefer an anonymous donor.
Dr. Deborah Cohan, an obstetrics and gynecology instructor at the University of California, San Francisco, said some lesbians prefer to receive sperm from a gay donor because they feel such a man would be more receptive to the concept of a family headed by a same-sex couple.
"This rule will make things legally more difficult for them," she said. "I can't think of a scientifically valid reason � it has to be an issue of discrimination." |
|
|
|
Hitchhiker
Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 3514
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Thu May 05, 2005 4:34 pm |
|
Why don't they just screen a person for HIV before allowing a donation if they are so worried?
|
|
|
zero
Rear Admiral
Joined: 03 Apr 2005
Posts: 4566
Location: Texas
|
| Thu May 05, 2005 4:39 pm |
|
I was going to post that, But I didn't want to sound like a dumb-a$$ cause I don't know what the process is for doning sperm.
But exactly!
|
|
|
Link, the Hero of Time
Vice Admiral
Joined: 15 Sep 2001
Posts: 5581
Location: Kokori Forest, Hyrule
|
| Thu May 05, 2005 5:01 pm |
|
I thought it was law that all Sperm donated had to be tested for HIV and various other diseases?
Sounds like generlization and discrimination to me.
|
|
|
madlilnerd
Duchess of Dancemat
Joined: 03 Aug 2004
Posts: 5885
Location: Slough, England
|
| Fri May 06, 2005 1:34 pm |
|
I read somewhere that the relatives of gay men are likely to have more children, apparently. Weird.
Anyway, it's kinda dumb that they won't let gay men donate sperm. Any man over here can do it, they just screen it afterwards to see what nasties are lurking. Hetrosexuals are more likely than gays to be carrying Hepititus, which is a pretty horrible disease.
And I can understand why some lesbians would like to impregnate themselves with a gay man's sperm too.
|
|
|
Dirt
Exercise Boy
Joined: 19 May 2003
Posts: 2086
Location: a tree
|
| Fri May 06, 2005 3:14 pm |
|
OMG, gay people have sperm too!? 
|
|
|
zero
Rear Admiral
Joined: 03 Apr 2005
Posts: 4566
Location: Texas
|
| Fri May 06, 2005 3:17 pm |
|
^ lol...
|
|
|
Birdy
Socialist
Joined: 20 Sep 2004
Posts: 13502
Location: Here.
|
| Fri May 06, 2005 3:21 pm |
|
| Dirt wrote: | | OMG, gay people have sperm too!? |
Welcome to my world     
-------signature-------
Nosce te ipsum
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri May 06, 2005 5:29 pm |
|
This is a good law. I'm glad about this. I think it's better for society.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Hitchhiker
Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 3514
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Fri May 06, 2005 5:32 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | This is a good law. I'm glad about this. I think it's better for society. |
Why?
It is impractical and inefficient. It would be better to test every sample for common sexually transmitted diseases. This way, the amount of incoming donations will remain the same, and no one accuses anyone of discrimination--win-win scenario.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri May 06, 2005 5:35 pm |
|
| Hitchhiker wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | This is a good law. I'm glad about this. I think it's better for society. |
Why?
It is impractical and inefficient. It would be better to test every sample for common sexually transmitted diseases. This way, the amount of incoming donations will remain the same, and no one accuses anyone of discrimination--win-win scenario. |
No. What I mean is that it's not a good thing for a child to be born with having two dads or two moms. They should have balanced parents.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
zero
Rear Admiral
Joined: 03 Apr 2005
Posts: 4566
Location: Texas
|
| Fri May 06, 2005 5:35 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | This is a good law. I'm glad about this. I think it's better for society. |
How is it better for society? What if a gay man says he is straight?? It would make no difference.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri May 06, 2005 5:38 pm |
|
| zero wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | This is a good law. I'm glad about this. I think it's better for society. |
How is it better for society? What if a gay man says he is straight?? It would make no difference. |
I believe I just answered that question But I don't think he would say he's straight, but I don't think that's relevant here.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Hitchhiker
Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 3514
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Fri May 06, 2005 5:39 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | No. What I mean is that it's not a good thing for a child to be born with having two dads or two moms. They should have balanced parents. |
I don't get it. What the FDA is doing is banning men who engage in homosexual activity from donating sperm . . . what does that have to do with raising a family?
|
|
|
zero
Rear Admiral
Joined: 03 Apr 2005
Posts: 4566
Location: Texas
|
| Fri May 06, 2005 5:41 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | No. What I mean is that it's not a good thing for a child to be born with having two dads or two moms. They should have balanced parents. |
Oh really? And who are you to say how people raise thier children. I know a lot of people who are gay/lesbian who have children. They kids don't even know. And who cares?
|
|
|
Starbuck
faster...
Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 8715
Location: between chaos and melody
|
| Fri May 06, 2005 6:14 pm |
|
Okay, there is a screen to test for HIV and other diseases of that nature when gametes are donated. This is another *beep* discrimination.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri May 06, 2005 6:27 pm |
|
| zero wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | No. What I mean is that it's not a good thing for a child to be born with having two dads or two moms. They should have balanced parents. |
Oh really? And who are you to say how people raise thier children. I know a lot of people who are gay/lesbian who have children. They kids don't even know. And who cares? |
I'm talking those that have two dads or two moms. That's not healthy.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Hitchhiker
Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 3514
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Fri May 06, 2005 6:47 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | I'm talking those that have two dads or two moms. That's not healthy. |
Yet how does prohibiting men who have engaged in homosexual activity from donating sperm have anything to do with that?
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri May 06, 2005 6:50 pm |
|
| Hitchhiker wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | I'm talking those that have two dads or two moms. That's not healthy. |
Yet how does prohibiting men who have engaged in homosexual activity from donating sperm have anything to do with that? |
Wait a second. Explain this to me. They are only DONATING it, not trying to get it developed for a child for themselves? Well then I'm sorry for not reading the article and jumping to judgments. If that's the case, then this is discrimination. I should not have rushed without reading the article. Apologies.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Jeff Miller
Fleet Admiral
Joined: 22 Nov 2001
Posts: 23947
Location: Mental Ward for the Mentaly Unstable 6th floor, Saint John's 1615 Delaware Longview Washington 98632
|
| Fri May 06, 2005 11:52 pm |
|
It's BS hell lets just kill all the gay people for trying to help others, I'm sure some would like that.
|
|
|
Dirt
Exercise Boy
Joined: 19 May 2003
Posts: 2086
Location: a tree
|
| Sat May 07, 2005 8:55 am |
|
*BIG FAT hugto all the gay people out there*
|
|
|
Starbuck
faster...
Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 8715
Location: between chaos and melody
|
| Sat May 07, 2005 9:23 am |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | Hitchhiker wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | I'm talking those that have two dads or two moms. That's not healthy. |
Yet how does prohibiting men who have engaged in homosexual activity from donating sperm have anything to do with that? |
Wait a second. Explain this to me. They are only DONATING it, not trying to get it developed for a child for themselves? Well then I'm sorry for not reading the article and jumping to judgments. If that's the case, then this is discrimination. I should not have rushed without reading the article. Apologies. |
They're only donating it.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Sat May 07, 2005 10:42 am |
|
^If there's no real threat of STDs, then this is not good, and it's discrimination that cannot occur. If the government is RIGHT in what they say, then it's fine.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
madlilnerd
Duchess of Dancemat
Joined: 03 Aug 2004
Posts: 5885
Location: Slough, England
|
| Sat May 07, 2005 10:48 am |
|
I think it's good that some places allow gay men to give sperm. It shows to society that they are as normal as any other man and have the sperm to show it.
|
|
|
Starbuck
faster...
Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 8715
Location: between chaos and melody
|
| Sat May 07, 2005 12:16 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | ^If there's no real threat of STDs, then this is not good, and it's discrimination that cannot occur. If the government is RIGHT in what they say, then it's fine. |
This is discrimination. They already have tests in place for donating gametes. They test for HIV and some other common diseases.
|
|
|
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
