As soon as women wear a short skirt, lippy and make-up they knowingly become a commodity and their children are instantly commoditised.

Women have to get over their sugar and spice and all things nice fantasy and realise if they put themselves on the market then they must face the price-war consequences as COMPETITION, not male evil rules the negativities of their existence.

At the end of 2030 when OIL is too expensive to buy, no one will have any rights let alone children or unborn children.

That's overpopulation and market saturation. Don't rely on governments and THEIR legal system to bail you out when they are profiting from human oversupply.

That's life. Women must get used to it or perish .. OR stop having more than one child you SELFISH little sods.

Shadow Minister wrote:
"Recent studies have shown DC children to be as well balanced as those in nuclear families, so while some people have angst over the issue, it is a tiny minority."

First I'd like to know what studies you are referring to. A recent study titled "My Daddy's Name is Donor" 15 major findings shows -
1) Young adults conceived through sperm donation (or “donor offspring”) experience profound struggles with their origins
and identities.
2) Family relationships for donor offspring are more often char-2.
acterized by confusion, tension, and loss.
3)Donor offspring often worry about the implications of inter-3.
acting with – and possibly forming intimate relationships with
– unknown, blood-related family members.
4)Donor offspring are more likely to have experienced divorce or 4.
multiple family transitions in their families of origin.
5)Donor offspring are significantly more likely than those raised 5.
by their biological parents to struggle with serious, negative
outcomes such as delinquency, substance abuse, and depression,
even when controlling for socio-economic and other factors.
6)Donor offspring born to heterosexual married couples, single 6.
mothers, or lesbian couples share many similarities.
7)At the same time, there appear to be notable differences between
donor offspring born to heterosexual married couples, single
mothers, and lesbian couples.

(continued on next post)

(continued from previous comment)

8)Donor offspring broadly affirm a right to know the truth about
their origins.
9)About half of donor offspring have concerns about or serious objections to donor conception itself, even when parents tell
the children the truth about their origins.
10)Openness alone does not appear to resolve the complex risks that
are associated with being conceived through sperm donation.
11)While a majority of donor offspring support a right to know the truth about their origins, significant majorities also sup-
port, at least in the abstract, a strikingly libertarian approach
to reproductive technologies in general.
12)Adults conceived through sperm donation are far more likely
than others to become sperm or egg donors or surrogates
themselves.
13)hose donor offspring who do not support the practice of donor conception are more than three times as likely to say they do
not feel they can express their views in public.
14)Donor conception is not “just like” adoption.
15)Today’s grown donor offspring present a striking portrait of racial, ethnic, and religious diversity.

You can read the entire report here (remove spaces to link): http : //familyscholars . org/my-daddys-name-is-donor-2/

Other important (new) research in the area may be found here (remove spaces to link):
https : //www . donorsiblingregistry . com/resource-library/dsr-research

Well, that about says it all.

Thanks, Donor Conceived, for your post.

I note that it has silenced the critics.

It is very difficult to argue with hard facts. Beats wild speculation any day.

In short, what every prospective client of mechanical means of reproduction. whether they are straight or gay, needs to know is that that it is by no means an undeviating road to inevitable family bliss and that the only unconsulted party to the interaction, the eventual offspring, is at considerable risk.

What straight and gay couple need to ask themselves is: is their own potential happiness of greater value than the potential harm to a yet-to-be-produced human being.

Given that, some may decide that childlessness is the only ethical option.

Sadly, the source is rather suspect.

The report come from the Institute for American Values, who make their intent crystal clear on their web site:

http://www.americanvalues.org/

"Our current work focuses on four goals.
To increase the proportion of children growing up with their two married parents.
To renew the ethic of thrift and replace the culture of debt and waste.
To help turn the intellectual tide against extremism in the Arab and Muslim world. [¿Qué?]
To improve and civilize our public conversation."

No hidden agendas there, then

The results of the survey speak for themselves. Anyone can look at those results and draw their own conclusions from them. The methodology, survey questions and responses are fully detailed in the report that is free to anyone to view and consider.

You can read the entire report here (remove spaces to link): http : //familyscholars . org/my-daddys-name-is-donor-2/

The results were not altered in any way. This is also the only survey that uses comparison groups.

I would still like to know what "studies" Shadow Minister was referring to:
"Recent studies have shown DC children to be as well balanced as those in nuclear families, so while some people have angst over the issue, it is a tiny minority."

I'm very familiar with the pre-existing studies on this subject. Not one proves this to be true and all are considerably flawed. (sample-recruitment methods/sample size, questions asked, age of participants, parental influence/involvement in responses etc.)