Eggs for Sale: Ethical Considerations
Not all that long ago, a couple wanting to have a child and experiencing difficulty conceiving had few options available to them. Normally, the circumstances meant a choice between continuing to try(and hoping fate would be on their side) and adoption. But as medical research and technology advanced and our knowledge of the human body and its workings grew, along came in vitro fertilization and fertility drugs. Eventually, this research spawned a number of other additional options, each as or more remarkable than the previous.
Initially, the options centered solely around the viability of the couple, but in the past twenty years we’ve seen an equally remarkable growth in the involvement of third parties, also called “assisted reproduction.” This has ranged from the use of the sperm or egg of a known person or a stranger to surrogacy, wherein another woman is implanted with the fertilized egg from the couple and carries the embryo and fetus to full term. In exchange, the third party often receives some compensation for involvement.
All of these advances answered the prayers of many, but it also left some people questioning whether science and technology had removed the “miracle” from conception. Many of the options were not without opposition, but most people accepted the advances because of the benefit they provided the couple “fulfilling a lifelong dream.” Questions arose immediately, however, about the role money played in determining for whom these options were available. Whether undergoing medical fertilization procedures, exploring various domestic and international adoption possibilities, or arranging for a third-party option, extra expenses are incurred-expenses that can be prohibitive to a large portion of the U.S. population. Many felt it was only a matter of time before some of these options were abused.
Nowhere is abuse of the system more possible or the controversy more heated than in third-party arrangements. The ethical and moral considerations of surrogacy have been questioned from the beginning. What are the surrogate’s rights? Does the surrogate have a right to maintain a relationship with the child? What are the couple’s rights? Such questions have led to a number of bitter, drawn-out court battles, which have caused some to avoid consideration of the surrogacy option altogether. Sperm and egg donorship, however, has been considerably less controversial … until recently.
In 1999, a couple of incidents occurred that sent egg and sperm donation into a new direction, one that has rocked ethicists across the United States. The first occurred in the spring of 1999, when a California couple, through their attorney, placed ads in university student newspapers across the country, offering $50,000 for a viable egg from a female college student who met very specific biological and intellectual criteria, such as age, height, athleticism, and scholastic aptitude. The universities were not just any universities, however; rather, they were the top academic universities in the country, such as Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford. Prior to this offer, the standard payment for egg donation ranged between $3,000 and $5,000, usually enough to cover the donor’s expenses. The offer of the California couple, however, raised the standards and began a movement toward what fertility specialists refer to as “commodification.” Sperm and egg donation, in general, carries the responsibility of accepting that, in time, a child may exist that was produced from the donor’s sperm or egg, a child that carries his or her genetic map. But for a student squeezing by on a limited budget, $50,000 became a very tempting offer, and left more than a few college women conflicted over it.
The second incident that took commodification of egg donation to an even higher level was the creation of a website in the fall of 1999 dedicated to the auctioning of donated eggs of beautiful models for fees as high as $150,000. Photographer Ron Harris created his new “business” on the premise that beauty is a valuable commodity in our culture, one that gains one certain advantages; therefore, “If you could increase the chance of reproducing beautiful children, and thus giving them an advantage in society, would you?” Although many people have questioned whether the site is legitimate or just a hoax, its premise has stirred controversy.
In both cases, the practice is, or would be, entirely legal. The controversy involves the ethical considerations. The option of “selecting” your child’s possible characteristics based on the known characteristics of the donor has existed for years, although not without opposition. Such information can even be viewed over the Internet by visiting the sites of various fertility centers. This latest twist, however, turns sperm and eggs into commodities. Ethicists argue that such practices “devalue respect for human life” and “promote disrespect for what gives individuals their worth, which is not appearance, but character.”
Students Speak Up:
What do you think about the “commodification” of sperm and eggs? Would you have taken the offer of $50,000 for your sperm or egg? What are additional ethical issues that could arise as a result of the commodification of egg and sperm donorship?