I entirely agree. I think she should sue whoever took the sperm out as well. Presumably there was no written consent and so this is assault. I don't see the difference in requiring consent for taking the sperm and consent for using it for its intended purpose and if they were happy to take the sample at that time I don't see why she should not have it now.
----------
From: Peter Glover[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 23 November 1996 17:39
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: BMA stand on sperm donation
I wonder if anyone shares my views on the poor lady who is trying to use
her dead husband's sperm for the child they both wanted. Not enough to
face the legal establishment but now the geriatric old farts at the BMA
have got to get their oar in. For God's sake what's the matter with
everyone? do they really think her husband would not have wanted a
child? To add insult to injury, who has got the right to stop her taking
his sperm abroad for someone with some common sense to sort her out?
Surely she has inherited all her dead husband's possessions to do with
as she will and don't a few spermatazoa count as possessions? Today I
feel ashamed to be part of a profession that is standing in the way of
this sad woman.
--
Peter Glover
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|