Weary Mum
I have never once used the term “feminazi”. The Nazi system was more of a political system, but feminism has more of the characteristics of a brainwashing cult than a political system.

Feminism has nothing to do with equality, but that is another topic.

In some cases male sperm donors donate without being paid, and in other cases male sperm donors are “recruited”, and then paid on a contract. But the payment is normally minimal, and any sperm or egg donor can be sued for child support at any time. The litigation of the doctor is basically for child support to be paid in one lump sum, and this occurred 3 years after the child was born. Similar has happened to sperm donors in other countries.

However there are many IVF clinics that now have a shortage of sperm donors for various reasons. This study highlights the nonchalant or even disdainful attitude that many IVF clinics have towards sperm donors,

http://www.ivf.net/ivf/index.php?page=out&id=2718

Across the globe IVF clinics have also shown minimal interest in fatherhood and in males, and only want males for their sperm. So the IVF industry cannot expect too many sperm donors in the future.

Country Gal,
Definitely, the comments from Weary Mum were abusive. Many men report verbal abuse and nagging from women, but of course this is not regarded as being abuse.

Many countries have the requirement that the child can learn the identity of their father when they turn 18 and in some cases 16.

I personally would be quite alarmed to know that I had been born in a test tube and that my father had been recruited by an industry that has minimal interest in fathers, and that my father’s sperm had been mixed with animal eggs for testing.

All very loving.

I am currently having IVF. To me, the Canberra case throws up issues of medicine and human error; of what we do when we discover, as we inevitably do, that doctors can and frequently do make mistakes. I do not believe this couple have chosen the best path; it seems to me that a philosophical approach would have served them better. To be a little poorer of appliances and holidays and a little richer in children is surely not a bad thing. Though I loathe sounding like a hippy or, worse, a Christian, I tend to think that the best response to misfortune is to chuck out some extra love at the world.

As always, I think Leslie's response excellent and measured. How ridiculous to suggest she is anti-father. For a start, I've read her write movingly and gratefully about her own father. A quick Google also finds her writing about "pervasive male anxiety about their role in women’s lives and in the business of forming and raising families – an expression to which compassion and validation would be the appropriate response." (http://www.eurekastreet.com.au/articles/0506cannold.html) On ABC TV's Compass, Leslie said of assisted reproduction that "men ... are worried. And I'm not criticizing them in any way for being worried about this, but they're worried about being left out of one of the most important things we do as humans - which is to create new humans. And I think that's very much what we need to start talking about. Why are they getting left out when the women who are leaving them out seem to be saying they don't really want to?" There are many more examples. By my reading, Ms Cannold empathises, and seeks to broaden the debate about fathers, not shut it down.

Continued below...

...continued from above:

My IVF clinic supports both me and my husband. IVF is terribly diffiucult thing for husbands - particularly if a couple has male-factor inferlity, and the man has to watch the woman he loves go through such extreme treatment. (IVF, for those of you who do not know, is quite a battering - like the mother of all PMS sessions.) My husband's name is included on all my treatment forms; he can come to all my appointments; he is an equal partner is the process of assisted reproduction.

The poster that feels sperm donation exploits men does not even mention egg donation. To learn more about egg donation, please read this excellent and moving piece by Kylie Ladd – http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/i-dont-need-to-know-my-donor-children/2007/08/13/1186857423043.html?page=fullpage – who donated her own eggs for the same reason many men donate sperm. Because it will help a couple who dearly wants a baby have a baby. Because it is a good and noble thing to do.

IVF is FULL of love. If and when I have a child, or children, I look forward to telling them how very much we wanted them; how we focussed on them during every ultrasound and every injection. I hope they'll think about the cleverness of their conception, and be amazed.

Botheration,
The enormous amount of time and money spent by so many people on IVF could have been spent on adoption, which I think would have suited many more children also.

The IVF clinics themselves are using the feminist chant of “reproductive rights”, but unless a father is actually paying money to an IVF clinic, then the IVF industry has shown minimal interests in fathers. (eg No public statements made about fatherhood, no submissions made to public enquiries concerning fathers, no attendance at fatherhood conferences etc.).

To the IVF industry, a male is either a pay check or a sperm donor, and as show in the study referenced previously, the IVF industry has even minimal regard for its recruited sperm donors.

I have rarely seen any tangible evidence to suggest that feminists are actually interested in fatherhood also. For example:- Various feminists in Europe did justifiably complain when research was carried out to clone the female egg, but these same feminists made no comment at all when experiments were carried out to fertilize a female egg without using male sperm.

It seems that these feminists regarded fertilizing a female egg without using male sperm as being a very natural act, and well within reproductive rights.

Hopefully the IVF industry will cease to exist shortly due to a shortage of both male sperm donors and female egg donors, and the harvesting of humans by the IVF industry will become a thing of the past. No one will have to litigate anyone then, which would solve that problem also.

In all her articles about children and parenting, this author has made very few comments about fathers, and any positive comments she has made about males in general are far outweighed by her negative comments. I would attribute this to prior feminist training.

Lordy be, HRS. You are bitter. I fear that neither of us will sway the other, but nevertheless, here goes.

IVF and adoption solve fundamentally different problems. The decrease in adoption has little to do with IVF: it dropped most markedly after the single mother’s benefit was introduced in the early 70s. Times have changed, and society generally accepts the time and money once spent on adoption is better spent, not on IVF, but on helping troubled families and single mothers to raise their own children. Money withdrawn from IVF would not flow to adoption.

IVF, conversely, attempts to fix infertility. The vast majority of procedures, including ours, use parental eggs and sperm. If donations ended tomorrow, IVF clinics would still function.

As for your statement that, “unless a father is actually paying money to an IVF clinic, then the IVF industry has shown minimal interests in fathers”, this is true for mothers too. Potential parents pay. The clinic itself is not fussed which gender coughs up. Once the treatment is in train, the clinic should afford fathers the same empathy and respect it affords mothers. Ours certainly does. If men are treated shoddily, HREOC monitors discrimination in IVF clinics. Also, the study you cite is American. In Australia it is illegal to pay women for donating eggs.

IFV clinics are not Amnesty International. Just because they do not put fathers’ rights front and centre does not mean they are not receptive to them; it means they are busying themselves with getting people pregnant.

Your attitude to “feminists” seems more informed by personal bitterness than impartial inquiry. Over and over you claim there’s no evidence feminists care about fathers. But don’t you see that you’re deaf to it? I’m a feminist, and I think fathers and men are absolutely bloody fantastic. So do others on this board. So does Dr Cannold. But you cannot hear it. Examine that.

We all strive lifelong to untangle our political views from dark psychological places. I’m crap at it myself. But the truth lies between the unraveled strands, so it’s worth a shot.

HRS, Botheration is right in pointing out that you appear to have your views of feminism from the extreme angle. As I have pointed out before, any large body of thought will have its moderates (generally 95%) and its extremists. Unfortunately its the extremists that are wont to jump up and down and make themselves heard. Most women would reject that suggestion that fathers and fatherhood is worthless, and yet most women could be classed as feminists. The few shrill women that carry on like pork-chops should generally be ignored. Most women ignore them, so try recognising them for the idiots that they generally are, and give them the same treatment.

IVF wont dry up if sperm OR egg donors run out. The main basis behind IVF is assisting infertile couples, and fertility drugs are usually the first port of call. Yes, there will be some couples who will also miss out if there are no donors, which is very sad for them. IVF is generally chosen over adoption, as adoption is very difficult in this country, and waiting lists can be so long that by the time a couple qualify, they will be deemed to be too old. Yes I agree that adoption rules could do with a real work-over, and perhaps a solution lies between traditional adoption and the fostering that is now preferred, something that allows natural parents to continue to have a role in the child's life.

As for promotion and support, what evidence do you have of the IVF industry providing support to women's associations etc?