Recently, as I was browsing Facebook, I stumbled upon an advertisement requesting egg donors. With curiosity heightened by our studies of human experimentation, I followed the link to EliteEggDonors.com. The site was offering $75000 to donors with the specific characteristics that Preferred Donors must have. Among these characteristics were: at least 5’8, athletic—“college or professional level”, very attractive--“Modeling experience a plus,” genetically healthy, and “proven intelligence.” While I could understand how future parents seeking a donor would want to reduce the number of problems their child may have and thus request the best possible donors, I was struck by the requirements of being “very attractive,” having “proven intelligence,” and being “athletic.” While I thought that egg banks coul offer help and support to couples that cannot successfully produce a child, and understood that the banks often go through a rigorous way of appropriately matching eggs and parents, I was initially skeptical of an egg bank requesting such “perfect” eggs. However, I realized that unlike designing children, egg donation is a way of resolving the problem of infertility, rather than seeking enhancement.
If an increasing number of humans began to use the eggs of, in their opinion, the most ideal or perfect person, diversity would probably begin to decline, and people may begin to follow trends in character, rather than accepting differences. While the comparison may be a stretch, the type of eggs in demand may follow a pattern similar to that of clothing—one “style” is in demand, but only a few months or years later, and a whole new “style” becomes popular. Looking at it from an economical perspective, the value of model-like looks, for example, or athletic ability would go down because almost everyone would embody those qualities. Long-term, people would become similar, which could have an array of social and perhaps even psychological consequences, such as devaluation of those without those qualities, inability to accept imperfection, and the like.
While these issues would become a concern if people turned to egg donation and in vitro fertilization as a primary means to choose their child’s characteristics, social chaos could ensue. However, egg banks really only appeal to those who physically cannot conceive or produce children, because in general, people want to have children of their own, with a genetic makeup derived from their own. Egg banks also tend to only offer their service as a solution for couples with existing procreative limitations, so it egg donation and usage can be placed in the realm of therapy, while it is not necessarily therapy by definition. Therefore, since egg banks serve those with reproductive disabilities, egg donation is ethical. Also, in order to reduce emotional complications for the family and the child, choosing children with favorable traits is in the favor of the entire family. In order to reduce unfavorable genetic tendencies that could cause more emotional duress, egg banks request those with the most preferable traits, so as to ensure, as best as possible, family contentment.
EliteEggDonors.com
www.northshorelijivf.com/donor-egg-program-long-island/donor-egg-faq-recipient.html
3 comments:
I have no qualms about egg donation, but the process of demanding specific qualifications of these eggs is both disturbing and unethical. These requirements create a certain ideal, thus enforcing the belief that society prefers a particular type of person over others and that there is a “correct” type of person. This eventually produces a division between the ones who fit the criteria and those who don’t. Not only will this reduce diversity, but it will also alienate human beings from each other, just because they are not of their own kinds. If sterile couples really wanted to raise a child, they should not care about certain qualifications, for if they were to have their own biological children, they could not have possibly selected certain traits for their children to possess. They would have loved their children regardless of their height, appearance, or intelligence. So why is it that when it concerns others’ eggs, potential parents become so critical and demanding? It is not right that these couples suddenly become so close-minded to children with less-than-ideal characteristics. No human being is perfect; children are no exception. Parents exist to minimize and correct these flaws in their children, so couples should not discriminate against certain eggs because they are inherently flawed. Otherwise, none of us would be here today.
I agree with Annie, egg donation itself is ethical and a positive institution for couples who cannot naturally conceive their own children. However, when parents begin to shop around for eggs with the potential to create the most successful, beautiful, intelligent children, then egg donation becomes unethical. As it stands now, egg banks are attractive to those who cannot have children, but if this practice of searching for the “best” potential children, this may not last long. Couples who desire certain traits in their children may forgo the natural process of conceiving children in favor of eggs of attractive, healthy, and athletic women. This would be a new effective way of searching for perfection among humanity, and is unethical because parents would love their children regardless of whether or not they are ideal offspring. It is for this reason that I slightly disagree with Birgitt, because as she puts it, “egg donation is a way of resolving the problem of infertility, rather than seeking enhancement.” My concern is that there would be an increased trend for couples that are perfectly capable of reproducing to seek eggs at such egg banks. This would turn the nature of egg banks into a way individuals could in fact seek enhancement. By defining this process as a method of enhancement seeking, the whole host of ethical issues comes into play as to whether humans should seek this degree of perfection.
Post a Comment