Talk:Donor conceived person

The Rights section

This article is propaganda and needs to be reworked to belong in wikipedia.

The statement "Most donor conceived people who are born from anonymous donation wish to have more information about their biological parent(s), so that they are able to complete their personal history," is speculation and completely unsupported.

The statement "The majority of donor conceived people (those who know about their conception) disagree with anonymous donation of any sort," is speculation and completely unsupported.

Knowing one's gene donor does not make one "able to complete their personal history" but rather only adds a piece to the puzzle. And despite the influence of genes, a donor and their offspring may have little in common.

Donor offspring have not been "deprived" off any part of their "identity." Rather, the agreement from the start was that they might never meet or know anything about their donor. Children have never been able to choose the circumstances into which they are born. And virtually children wish for other circumstances at some point.

Definitions of 'identity' from the Internet include: -the distinct personality of an individual regarded as a persisting entity; "you can lose your identity when you join the army" -the individual characteristics by which a thing or person is recognized or known; "geneticists only recently discovered the identity of the gene that causes it"; "it was too dark to determine his identity"; "she guessed the identity of his lover" -The set of behavioral or personal characteristics by which an individual is recognizable as a member of a group. -The distinct personality of an individual regarded as a persisting entity; individuality. ...knowing one's donor does not affect one's identity.

The statement "Where a child is illegally deprived of some..." is of no consequence here. Donor offspring have not been illegally deprived of anything.

The Rights section was removed. Mikael Häggström (talk) 06:20, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Merge

The pages for Donor offspring and Donor conceived people should be merged. The term "Donor offspring" is considered offensive by some, so in my opinion, Donor-conceived people (with a hyphen) should be the one page, with links as appropriate. Some other pages should also link here. I'll do it if no-one else volunteers, but I'm hoping that someone with more Wiki experience will volunteer... Ml66uk2 (talk) 03:57, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Due to the the offence that the donor-conceived feel at being treated the way they are, and say so, on http://whosedaughter.blogspot.com any offence taken by thw writer of the above objection must see that offences work both ways. But ideologically speaking, the last word about the donation of egg and sperm should go to the younger generation who will outlive the adults involved, and suffer just as much as them but for reasons of their own, and it's not the nicest legacy to be screwed up. But for the sake of democracy, I hope and trust that this edit remains open.

The merge is done. Mikael Häggström (talk) 06:20, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

This whole article is propaganda and needs to be rewritten.

The reason there is no sitation for the idea that only 10% of donor conceived persons "will be told" by their parents is because it is not true. It may have been true thirty years ago. Thw whole thrust of this article is to incite fear of incest and other horors. The donor conception network has much better information thanh this. For that matter, so does California Cryobank. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.202.89.83 (talk) 20:31, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Do they gain high status?

Do donor conceived people have high status occupations? Since women choose only hihg status male's sperm to impregnate themselves this is an important question. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.103.187.133 (talk) 06:06, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Donor conceived person. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100816070110/http://www.hfea.gov.uk:80/110.html to http://www.hfea.gov.uk/110.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:34, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

views of donor conceived people

Hi, I'm pretty new to writing stuff on wikipedia, but I was looking at this page and I think adding more information about donor conceived people's views on donor conception, anonymity, etc would be valuable as well as differences in experiences of donor conceived people with different family structures (same-sex v opposite-sex parents and two-parent households v single-parent households).

I'm posting this because I will be working on this in the coming days/weeks and I wanted to announce it in case anyone wants to help by adding things or checking my work to make sure that I am being sufficiently objective since I am new. Thanks!

FutureLesbianLawyer (talk) 05:21, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, when publishing an edit I received a notification for citing a blogspot website and I just wanted to explain that I was using it as an example of a perspective that some donor-conceived people may have on their conception not exactly as a source of factual information. Hopefully that is ok? If not I can find another source. FutureLesbianLawyer (talk) 00:38, 25 February 2021 (UTC)