It's me, your daughter

A lawsuit about discrimination against children who were born with the help of the donor genetic material in Canada is finished. Back in the 1982 Olivia Pratten was born from genetic material in the province of British Columbia (Canada).

She grew up, and in 2008 filed a lawsuit demanding to disclose the identity of her genetic parent. The reason for the claim is that, as Olivia says, test-tube kids "are entitled to know their genetic origin." The girl also believes that a refusal to give them this information "violates the Charter of Rights and Freedom, as well as discriminates them in relation to the adopted children", which are given the similar right.

After several hearings in the lower instances, the Supreme Court declined to consider the "test-tube baby" case thereby maintaining donation in Canada anonymous. The official reason of the Canadian authorities for denial to review the Olivia’s case was an infringement the rights of donors and the "intrusion upon their privacy". Although I think there are other motives. The point is that there are no sperm and egg cells’ banks in some Canadian provinces, so often biomaterial comes from American storages. It is unlikely that the U.S. government would infringe on the rights of its citizens for the sake of compliance with the new laws of Canada.

By the way, the opposite decision was made by the court of Great Britain several years ago. Now an anonymous donorship is prohibited there. What have they got as a result? Have the judicial complaints been reduced? Hardly. But there are less people now who want to give their biomaterial. There is no surprise, especially considering the amount of stories about donors who were forced to bear the financial responsibility for their offspring. Now there are more and more donors in the UK who decided to escape from such a charity, as they say, out of harm's way.