Pride Angel

Get your dates straight
There is an increasing anxiety about getting pregnant, especially for women over 35, but don’t feel as if you need to go straight for IVF. Work out when you ovulate. Ovulation occurs 14 days before your period, so this is the best time to try for a baby. If you are over 35 try for six months, and if you have no luck speak to your GP about alternatives

Check your BMI
If you are underweight or overweight it can affect your normal hormonal balance and ovulation cycle. If you are overweight eat healthily, but don’t think that you need to cut out certain foods, such as full-fat dairy. Medical researchers discovered that women who included full-fat milk, cheese, ice cream and cream in their diets had higher levels of fertility

Keep it balanced
We need a good alkaline/acid balance in our diet to make sure our body functions are working, so cutting out highly acidic foods and drinks can make you more fertile. Meat and carbonated drinks are highly acidic, while dairy and leafy green vegetables are more alkaline, as is bottled water, which contains magnesium and calcium

Watch your alcohol
Keep your intake within health guidelines as it can rob your body of key nutrients – the NHS recommends no more than two to three units a day for women. If you smoke you should quit. Smoking takes vitamins B and C from your body and suppresses your appetite, as well as causing acidity – all of which will make you less fertile

Top up your vitamins
Supplements can help with your fertility, but you should still have a balanced diet. Iron is particularly useful – check with your GP before taking it. Many women, though not clinically anaemic, will be iron-deficient to some extent

Don’t overexercise
A lot of women think that before they become pregnant they must get really fit and healthy, but preparing for pregnancy isn’t the same as training for a marathon. Keep exercise regular, but gentle. For some women overexercising can stop ovulation. Pilates and yoga are both especially good. Your body just needs to be in a balanced, healthy state

Have more sex
You need to have lots of sex. It will gear up your reproductive hormones and help stabilise your cycle. This doesn't just apply to straight couples - it also applies to lesbian couples, having more sex will help you relax and if using artificial insemination and you are in a couple - then having sex with your partner after insemination will help the sperm on its journey!

Article by Harriet Griffey www.telegraph.co.uk

Read more tips on boosting fertility and getting pregnant using home insemination at www.prideangel.com

Doctors have issued a stark warning to couples not to leave it too late to try for a baby.

With more and more women pursuing careers, they and their partners are leaving parenthood to at least their late thirties.

But women aged 35 are six times more likely to have problems conceiving compared to those ten years younger, warns a major study from the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. The report says older parents are making it harder for themselves to have children – and increasing the likelihood of serious medical complications for both mother and baby. By the age of 40, a woman is more likely to have a miscarriage than give birth.

Men’s fertility also declines rapidly from the age of 25 and the doctors estimate that the average 40-year-old takes two years to get his partner pregnant – even if she is in her twenties. The report is a clear and authoritative wake-up call on the dangers of late parenthood. However, increasing numbers of couples are doing just that without properly understanding the consequences – and the risks.

Separate figures show that the number of mothers giving birth after their 40th birthday has trebled in the last 20 years. Almost 27,000 babies were born to mothers over 40 last year compared to with 9,336 in 1989. The doctors insist women should be given clear reminders that ‘the most secure age for childbearing remains 20 to 35’.

Up to 30 per cent of 35-year-olds take longer than a year to get pregnant, compared to only 5 per cent of 25-year-olds, according to the figures in the report by the Royal College. The research, which looked at several major studies on fertility, also shows that the average childbearing age has risen from 23 in 1968 to 29.3 today.

Expectant mothers in their late thirties and forties are far more likely to suffer complications such as pre-eclampsia, ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage or stillbirth and they are also more likely to need a Caesarean. Babies born to them are more likely to be premature, smaller or have Down’s Syndrome and other genetic disorders.

Doctors warn that government campaigns to cut teenage pregnancy and boost contraception uptake may have resulted in young people thinking they can delay parenthood indefinitely. They also say that IVF has given women a ‘false sense of security’, despite major breakthroughs in recent years.

Fertility treatment has a 3 per cent success rate for women over the age of 44. More than half of those having such treatment in their forties use donor eggs, because their own supply has diminished, or the quality of those remaining is not good enough.

The study, published in the medical journal Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, says that risks of prolonging parenthood should be taught at school alongside lessons on safe sex.

Researchers also say charts showing the decline of fertility with age should be put up in surgeries and family planning clinics.

David Utting, specialty registrar in obstetrics and gynaecology at Kingston Hospital NHS Trust and co-author of the review, said: ‘Clear facts on fertility need to be made available to women of all ages to remind them that the most secure age for childbearing remains 20-35.

‘However women and doctors should remain vigilant to prevent unplanned and unwanted pregnancies.’ Fertility experts say that there is not enough provision in the workplace to allow women to simultaneously have children while pursuing a career.

Gedis Grudzinskas, a consultant in infertility and gynaecology, said: ‘Many women I see say they find it very difficult to try to do everything. ‘Society has changed and there is now much more opportunity to follow exciting careers – especially with such inadequate provision of childcare. ‘Women achieve career satisfaction and decide they want to start a family but by this time it is too late and they can’t turn the clock back.’

He added: ‘We should be making it easier for women to start a family while they are at work.’ Jason Waugh, consultant in obstetrics and editor in chief of the Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, said: ‘This review highlights the problems associated with later maternal age.

‘There are a number of reasons why women are leaving it later to start a family, for example, career concerns, financial reasons and finding a suitable partner. ‘However, women should be given more information on the unpredictability of pregnancy and the problems that can occur in older mothers.’

Article: 28th January 2011 www.dailymail.co.uk

Is it taking too long to get pregnant? try home insemination, for more information visit www.prideangel.com

A WOMAN conceived with the help of a sperm donor has taken a rare legal step to find out the identity of her biological father.

In a case that could affect thousands of donor-conceived families, Kimberley Springfield has asked a tribunal to overturn a bureaucratic decision that no action be taken to help identify the donor.

Her case comes as state and federal parliamentary inquiries due to report in the coming months consider donor conception and the rights of donor-conceived people to gain access to identifying information about their donors.

In submissions to both inquiries, Ms Springfield, 26, whose sister and at least four half siblings were conceived with her biological father's sperm, said she had suffered mentally, emotionally and physically from being denied knowledge about her family since she found out how she was conceived five years ago.

''I cannot fathom going through life never knowing where I have come from, my ancestry and my identity,'' Ms Springfield wrote. ''Every day I look at the faces of people around me and wonder: 'Could you be my father, my half sister, my half brother, my grandparent?'''

Ms Springfield was born before 1988, when sperm donors were completely anonymous. The identity of her donor is not recorded on the voluntary register of donors kept by the Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages.

In Victoria, where Ms Springfield lives, those born between 1988 and 1997 have the right to access information about the donor if the donor agrees and only those born after 1997 have an absolute right to information.

Ms Springfield has asked the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal to review the registrar's decision to deny her recent request that they seek the donor's identity from a medical institution and then write to the donor advocating the purpose and benefit of the voluntary register.

Peter Hanks, QC, for Ms Springfield, said the Assisted Reproductive Treatment Act stated that ''the registrar may from time to time publicise the establishment and purpose of the voluntary register''. He argued this provision needed to be read together with a part of the Births, Deaths and Marriages Act dealing with the registrar's general functions.

A Senate inquiry into donor conception in Australia, due to report next month, has heard from many parents, fertility specialists and counsellors who have called for national laws to establish a compulsory national donor register.

Article: 27th January 2011 The Sydney Morning Herald www.smh.com.au

Looking for a known sperm donor or wishing to donate to a lesbian couple, single or infertile couple by personal arrangement? visit www.prideangel.com

The day after I saw them at the Golden Globes, I read that Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban had welcomed a new baby into their family. My immediate thought was 'what designer was she wearing? She didn't look pregnant at all!'. Well, okay, maybe I didn't think that, I'm not that blonde, but for a split-second there was a confused frown on my face.

Kidman and Urban had the latest addition to their family via a surrogate which means someone else carried the baby for them. Until recently, Altruistic Surrogacy; the act of carrying someone else's baby for no money, was illegal in Australia. Furthermore, Commercial Surrogacy is still considered to be a criminal act in a lot of countries - but why?

There are plenty of others who have also gone down this path such as Elton John & David Furnish who had their son Zachary via an anonymous egg donor. This latest round of celebrity surrogate babies are nothing new though. Ricky Martin famously had twins via a surrogate mother prior to revealing the truth about his long speculated sexuality. The same thing happened with footballer Cristiano Ronaldo; before you get too excited I'm talking about the surrogacy part, not his sexuality.

Surrogacy as an option for having children is a very important one in my personal opinion. If a mother is unable to conceive through IVF or afford repeated rounds of the treatment which is extremely expensive, then having a child via surrogate may be their last hope of having a biological child of their own. It may not be as nature intended, but does that mean that we should deny those who long for children of their own the opportunity to become parents?

A recent story line in one of my favourite TV show "Brothers & Sisters" featured a surrogate mother when characters Kevin and Scotty had a friend impregnated. Aside from adopting children, surrogacy is the only means of two gay men or even a single gay man having a biological child of their own. This is certainly the case with Ricky Martin who is a single parent to his twins.

There are still people who think that those in same-sex relationships or those who wish to become single parents should not be allowed to do so. With so many single parents these days, these people are simply ignorant. Surrogacy does not have the same number of hoops to jump through and restraints that adoption does and is likely a much easier process than attempting adoption.

I read that a couple of states in the USA actually exclude gay couples from being allowed to have children via surrogacy. The law in Florida describes in a rather sneaky and underhanded way that qualifying couples are to be "a man and woman who are married where the woman has a medical need to seek a surrogate". I'm not sure if that is still the case now, but it was until recently.

I wouldn't say that surprises me, but the restrictions and objections to surrogacy all seem to be more about the interference with nature rather than whether hopeful parents should be allowed to fulfill their dreams of having biological children whether that be straight, gay, married or unmarried or even single parents. Surely the only question to be asked in that case is if they have the means to support a child and raise them?

Article: by Chaz Harris www.stuff.co.nz

Read more about gay parenting and surrogacy at www.prideangel.com

A surrogate mother who had a baby girl for a couple but changed her mind about handing her over is allowed to keep her, a judge has ruled.

The welfare of the six-month-old child, known only as T, "requires her to remain with her mother", said Mr Justice Baker, giving reasons yesterday for a decision he made after a hearing in Birmingham last month.

He said: "In my judgment, there is a clear attachment between mother and daughter. To remove her from her mother's care would cause a measure of harm. It is the mother who, I find, is better able to meet T's needs, in particular her emotional needs."

The judge said the risks of entering into a surrogacy agreement are "very considerable".

He added: "In particular, the natural process of carrying and giving birth to a baby creates an attachment which may be so strong that the surrogate mother finds herself unable to give up the child."

He said the mother met the couple, Mr and Mrs W, over the internet in 2009 and agreed informally that the mother would be inseminated by Mr W, and hand the baby over after the birth.

During the pregnancy, however, she changed her mind, and at T's birth refused to hand over the baby as agreed.

The mother has two older children. Mr W is a chef and he and Mrs W were married in 2005.

After Mr and Mrs W were married, they tried to have a baby themselves, but their attempts resulted in a series of miscarriages, which led them to consider surrogacy.

It was agreed that the mother would act as a surrogate for the Ws, using Mr W's sperm, and she became pregnant, but at some point during the pregnancy, relations between the parties deteriorated.

Article: 22nd January 2011 www.yahoo.com

Read more about surrogacy and gay parenting at www.prideangel.com

After four ­miscarriages and six failed IVF ­treatments, Mandy Parry was no stranger to studying charts in her quest to be a mum.

She knew precisely where she was in her menstrual cycle as readily as she knew the day of the week. In the five years she and her ­husband Mark had been trying to ­conceive, Mandy tried ­spiritual ­healing, feng shui, ­acupuncture, organic diets and a host of herbal remedies.

Then, in a last attempt, Mandy ­consulted a fertility astrologer to help her get pregnant.

‘Mark and I had spent more than £50,000 on treatments and we’d both taken ­second jobs to pay for them,’ Mandy says. ‘All the ­heartbreak had made me ­profoundly depressed - at times I wanted to die. The odds were so stacked against us.’ But now the couple are the proud parents of eight-month-old Violet. And Mandy has no doubt it was astro-­fertility that has helped to fulfil her dream of becoming a mother.

‘Though I was sceptical, I was also ­desperate,’ says Mandy. ‘I don’t even read my horoscope and Mark thought it was a complete waste of money. But when you want a baby as badly as I did, you will ­consider anything. 'Since Violet was born I feel ­intoxicated with happiness. I still can’t quite believe she’s here. All of my ­scepticism has melted away.’

But can credit for this miracle ­conception really be given to ­star-­gazing - and is there a shred of ­evidence to support it?

Astro-fertility works on the ­assumption that there are only two or three times a year when a woman can become pregnant and go on to ­successfully give birth. Those windows are ­particular to each woman based on her and her partner’s time and place of birth and the alignment of planets at those moments. It is only when the position of those planets is replicated that a woman can conceive.

‘It sounds like nonsense,’ says Mandy, a secondary school teacher. ‘But we’d exhausted all other options so I thought: “Why not?”' She and Mark, a community safety worker, met in May 2004 when Mandy was 39 and eager to have a family. But, just as their ­relationship got ­serious, Mark, 47, made a confession - he’d had a ­vasectomy a few years back, following the birth of his three sons from his first marriage.

After speaking to their doctor, Mandy and Mark were told that rather than try to reverse the vasectomy, they could retrieve sperm from Mark and use it to fertilise one of Mandy’s eggs via IVF.

But despite six attempts over four years - at a cost of up to £8,000 a time - the ­procedures were unsuccessful. ‘Each failure and miscarriage left me in pieces,’ says Mandy.

‘We would spend months organising it, have the treatment, lose the baby, spend several months working to pay off the debt we’d accrued and then start again.

Eventually, at the end of 2008, I promised Mark I wouldn’t put us through it again.’

Then Mandy read on a ­website about fertility astrologer Nicola Smuts, who, it was claimed, had predicted times when couples would conceive. Nicola had a clinic in Bath, just a few miles from the Parrys’ home in Bristol, so Mandy decided it was worth a visit - though Mark was highly sceptical.

‘When I went for my ­appointment I had to take along details of mine and Mark’s births, which seemed bizarre. Mark said I was crazy for going along with it,’ she says. He was even more doubtful when Nicola told Mandy her next fertile window was in August - in just six weeks. ‘She told us we should move heaven and earth to have an IVF transfer (when embryos are implanted into the womb) then.

‘I couldn’t believe Nicola was telling me to do it within six weeks, but she was adamant that I must pull out all the stops. Thankfully the clinic was very accommodating and we were all set to go ahead just before the end of August.

‘Mark was fuming that I was ­following Nicola’s advice. And, to be honest, as a rational person, I didn’t believe what she’d told me either, but I was so ­desperate I was willing to try anything.’

One week later, Mandy got the call she’d been longing for. She was pregnant. ‘It wasn’t until after our ­daughter’s birth, when I was lying in the bath and Violet was asleep in her cot, that I really ­let myself experience the joy,’ she says.

The question, of course, is whether it was good luck - or ­astrological influences - that helped Mandy conceive.

Nicola Smuts has no doubt it was the ­latter. The 45-year-old ­fertility astrologer had herself tried for eight years to conceive a child with her second husband, having had two grown-up children from her first marriage.

Nicola says: ‘I started out as a regular ­astrologer then decided to look at my chart to see if there were any clues as to why I wasn’t getting pregnant. I saw the planetary odds were stacked against me.’

Though she had no joy with her own chart, she soon found ­herself advising other women on the most fortuitous months to conceive.

She says: ‘Before long I was ­predicting pregnancies for other women. Word spread, and this became the bulk of my work.’

Nicola charges a one-off £150 fee for an ‘astrological fertility consultation’ - in which she studies the couple’s birth charts. ‘Jupiter and its mathematical relationship to a woman’s birth chart is key to ­working out when she will have a baby,’ she says.

It may sound unscientific, but the results of Nicola’s work have generated enough interest for her to have been approached by a U.S. IVF clinic, Shady Grove Fertility, which will put her claims to the test. The clinic has provided Nicola with birth details of ­hundreds of its clients in the hope she can ­predict the best times for them to conceive.

However, fertility experts this side of the pond are more ­sceptical. ­Pioneering Professor of Fertility Robert Winston described the ­suggestion that astrology can predict fertility as ‘utter rubbish’.

‘There is not the slightest ­evidence that star signs make the slightest difference to fertility,’ says Prof Winston. ‘It’s shocking to me that anyone would make that claim based on anecdotal events. What worries me is that infertility is the cause of desperate ­sadness and couples will grasp any kind of straw such as this.’

Yet the words of eminent ­scientists will do nothing to dissuade the truly desperate — even highly ­educated women such as science author Catherine Blackledge. The 42-year-old, from Preston, ­Lancashire, has a chemistry PhD, but credits astro-fertility for the birth of her baby, Willow Rose, in May.

Like Mandy, Catherine and her husband Steve Hill, 46, endured four IVF attempts and two ­miscarriages before turning to astrology. She was introduced to the idea by a lecturer in astrology whom she met when researching a book. ‘I’m a scientist and we’re told that we should laugh at ­astrology in our culture,’ she says. ‘But I’ve approached this with an open mind.’

Catherine had her consultation with Nicola Smuts in August 2008, just a month after her second ­miscarriage. Nicola pinpointed two fertile times for the couple to try another cycle of IVF. The next was in February 2009, when sadly their frozen embryos failed to ­survive, and then again in August 2009.

‘I knew we would be laughed at for putting credence in astrology,’ says Catherine. ‘But I just kept telling the clinic: “It has to be then.” The way I saw it, we were using a mix of cutting-edge ­science and a dose of magic.’

Nicola’s predications came true, and Willow was born in May. ‘I know many people will say we were successful because we used this new type of IVF, but I also like to think we chose a propitious time. I would say to any woman, try astro-fertility, because I believe it works,’ she says

Her view is shared by health ­psychologist Dr Pat Harris, who researched the link between a woman’s fertility and horoscope for her PhD.

She says: ‘I found that women who knew their exact time of birth who then used an astro­logical chart to p­redict their best time to conceive could increase their chances of conception by 23 per cent.’

She adds: ‘We have more to learn, but ­astrology seems to be an effective way of ­identifying fertility windows that other systems do not.’

Despite happy endings such as Mandy’s and Catherine’s, IVF ­support groups such as Infertility Network UK are still very ­cautious. A spokesman for the group said: ‘Although some couples may have been successful using fertility astrology, there will be many more for whom this has not worked.

‘They need to think carefully before spending lots of money on treatments because an astrologer says it’s their most fertile time. Some couples eventually have to face up to the fact they are unlikely to have a child.’

Ironically, Mandy Parry would once have stated the case even more strongly. ‘I’m no hippy and used to rail against the exploitation of desperate women by anyone giving false hope,’ she says.

‘And until I got pregnant I thought Nicola was a crank. But when I look at our perfect baby I’m so happy that I ignored my rational self.’

Article: 20th January 2011 www.dailymail.co.uk

Read more tips on boosting fertility and using home insemination to increase your chances of getting pregnant at www.prideangel.com

The HFEA is launching a public consultation about sperm and egg donation. The HFEA believes that the current level of remuneration – £250 per donation for "reasonable expenses" and loss of earnings may but deterring donors.

One in seven British couples have problems conceiving and the demand from infertile, single and gay couples for donated eggs and sperm is steadily rising.

The consultation will focus on three main areas of policy:

:The level of compensation for donors
:The number of families a donor can help to create
:Family donation

Prof Lisa Jardine, Chair of the HFEA said:

‘The donation of sperm and eggs is a generous act and donors have helped many thousands of people achieve their dream of having a child. We know that many people are facing long waiting lists at clinics because of a shortage of donors. We want to ensure that we have the best policies in place so that there are no unnecessary barriers in the way of those wishing to donate whilst protecting those who are born as a result of donation.’

Compensation for donors
Payment for donation is not allowed by law. It does, however, allow compensation for inconvenience, in addition to expenses and loss of earnings. Our current policy is designed to ensure that donors are not out of pocket by donating but that they do not gain financially from it. We currently allow donors to be compensated for expenses and loss of earning, but not for inconvenience.

Feedback from clinics, however, shows that not only do some donors end up out of pocket, but the system is more complex than it needs to be. We are therefore seeking views about whether clinics should offer a lump sum, rather than reimbursing for actual expenses.

Another question in the consultation is whether the HFEA should introduce compensation for inconvenience, as some other European countries do. This move may remove a barrier to donation, but we have to be careful that it does not create a financial incentive to donate. Other countries have different schemes in place. For example, in Denmark, sperm donors receive 50–150 Euros (£45-£135) for the examination, use of their time and travel expenses. In Spain, egg donors are compensated 900 Euros (around £765) whereas sperm donors are compensated 45 Euros (around £40) per valid sample they produce. This is a blanket fee for loss of earnings, expenses and inconvenience.

Another key question for the consultation is issue of egg sharing, where patients donate their eggs in return for a reduction in the cost of their treatment.

The number of families a donor can help to create
The HFEA set a limit on the number of families one donor’s eggs or sperm can be used to help create. The current limit is ten families. This limit minimises the possibility of two children from the same donor having a relationship with each other without knowing they are genetically related. It also addresses the perceived needs of donor conceived people and their parents in maintaining a relatively small number of siblings.

The HFEA are seeking views on what the family limit should be, to ensure the right balance is struck between increasing the availability of donated eggs and sperm and protecting the interests of donors and donor-conceived people.

Family donation
Family donation includes many different types of donation relationships, some more common than others. Donation between sisters, cousins and brothers are the most common donation relationship. The HFEA have also had reports of mother to daughter, daughter to mother, father to son and son to father.

Receiving sperm or eggs from a family member is an attractive option for some as it maintains a genetic link between the recipient and any child born as a result. It can also avoid long waiting lists at fertility clinics.

Donation of this kind can, however, raise some social and ethical issues such as unusual genetic and social relationships. For example, if a woman donates an egg to her sister she will be the genetic mother and social aunt of any child born as a result.

There are a number of options for regulation of family donation including a ban on the mixing of sperm and eggs between close genetic relatives (those who would otherwise be banned from having sex with each other) or only ban the mixing of sperm and eggs between genetic relatives.

The HFEA could also issue additional best practice guidance to clinics or ask them to have a strategy in place to handle cases of family donation.

How to participate
People can share their views through a series of questionnaires on the consultation pages of the HFEA's website. They will also be holding a series of workshops with patients, donors, parents of donors conceived people, as well as those who are donor conceived. The HFEA will also be consulting with clinics.

The HFEA wish to hear a wide range of views both from those directly affected and those who are interested in the issues. The consultation ends on April 17 and decisions will be made at the Authority meeting in July.

To take part and have your say, follow this link www.hfea.gov.uk

To read more about gay parenting, sperm and egg donation visit www.prideangel.com

Starting a family the "old-fashioned way" is becoming less common. Only 25% of American households are made up of a husband, wife, and a child. The fertility field is continually growing with advances in scientific technology, and infertile patients have more options for conceiving -- including the use of donor sperm. Along with the medical advances comes the continual need for emotional support for both the parent and children.

The American Fertility Association, a 501(c)3 national non-profit organization, is excited to announce the release of its second fact sheet in a series of articles designed to help parents who are wondering about whether or how to share their children's donor origins with them. The first article in this series, Talking with Children about Ovum Donation, addressed the long-term implications of disclosure and non-disclosure, parents' concerns about disclosure, current research about parents who disclose, guidelines for sharing information with children, and some suggested words and expressions for doing so.

Jean Benward, LCSW, and Patricia Mendell, LCSW, both mental health professionals specializing in infertility issues, recently completed the second fact sheet, Talking with Children about Sperm Donation. This latest comprehensive article acknowledges that couples deciding to use sperm donation face decisions and experiences that are both similar and different from those using ovum donation. These differences include the greater history of secrecy and stigma associated with sperm donation, the relative "silence" about male infertility and cultural myths about male parenting. This resource is a lifetime tool for families created through sperm donation who would like to talk to their children and others about their donor origins.

This fact sheet is the second in a series of five articles and is designed primarily for heterosexual couples considering sperm donation. The next two articles will focus on the unique experiences and issues faced by lesbian couples and single women who use sperm donation. "While donor insemination (DI) has been available for heterosexual couples for nearly a century, this was not true for single women and lesbians," explains Jean Benward. "Even now, single women and lesbians face prejudice in the larger culture where many people deny the legitimacy of families formed without fathers."

The AFA is committed to supporting people in creating their families by providing updated educational material on infertility prevention, reproductive health and family-building. The AFA's website features an online library, weekly newsletter, webinars and a toll-free help line to consumers free of charge.

The AFA is fortunate to have contributors like Jean and Patricia. With health care professionals of this exceptional caliber, we are able to deliver first-rate information to our readers, serving them fresh ways to deal with complex topics such as sperm donation.

Article: 15th January 2010 www.medicalnewstoday.com source: American Fertility Association

Considering sperm donation? looking for a sperm donor? visit www.prideangel.com

Would you like to take part in some cutting edge, exciting new research? Susanna Graham, a PhD student at the Centre for Family Research, University of Cambridge, is undertaking a study exploring the decision-making and experiences of single women in the UK using donor sperm to achieve motherhood and is looking for volunteers to take part in the study. Further details about the study can be found below and if you would like more information or think you might be interested in taking part then please e-mail Susanna at smg57@cam.ac.uk

Why is the study being done?
Single motherhood by choice is a growing family trend. Some women choose to use donors from British sperm banks, some import sperm from abroad and others use known donors. Internet sperm donor matching sites such as Pride Angel are also an option for women wanting to find a sperm donor. Single women using donor sperm has sparked much ethical debate amongst policy makers and the media but very little is known about the women who make this choice and there has been no research into why women might use internet matching sites to find a donor. This study therefore aims to better understand the issues and factors important to women embarking upon single motherhood by choice, to hear their own thoughts and feelings about their situation and the choices they are making regarding donor sperm.

Am I eligible to take part?
If you are a heterosexual woman living in the UK who is currently trying or thinking about getting pregnant with the aid of donor sperm and are currently not in a relationship with a partner then you are eligible to take part in this study.

What does taking part involve?
Choosing to take part in the study would involve you being interviewed by a researcher about your reasons for pursuing motherhood alone, the decisions you have made regarding how to embark upon motherhood, particularly about finding a donor, and your experiences of this so far. Anything that you say during this research will be kept strictly confidential. The study has received ethical approval from the Ethics Committee of the School of Humanities and Social Science, University of Cambridge.

What will happen to the findings of the research?
The findings of this research will be written up and submitted as a PhD thesis. It is also expected that they will be used for publication in academic journals and presented at academic conferences. They will also be made available to Pride Angel and other specialist groups of professionals who are directly involved in working with single women using donor sperm and so therefore may help other women in similar situations.

Want to find out more? Contact us at Pride Angel

International surrogacy has become big news. Last month, a landmark international commercial surrogacy case, Re L [1], attracted front page national headlines. Hard on its heels the media spotlight fell on the birth of Elton John and David Furnish's US surrogate born son, Zachary, on Christmas Day. This has fuelled the debate about surrogacy and the question is why has it generated such attention? The decision in Re L attracted front page national headlines because it marks a significant watershed in the history of UK surrogacy law. For the first time the court has made clear that the child's welfare will trump public policy on payments. It is only the third published case of its kind to ratify a foreign commercial surrogacy arrangement. Having represented the parents in this case (as well as the first parents to secure a parental order in the case of X&Y in 2008 [2]) I know how difficult and sensitive these applications are and quite how much is at stake.

In Re L, a High Court judge, Mr Justice Hedley, awarded legal parenthood to the British couple who entered into a commercial surrogacy arrangement with a surrogate mother in Illinois, USA. Notwithstanding the public policy ban on commercial surrogacy in the UK (which allows only the payment of reasonable pregnancy related expenses to a surrogate, unless retrospectively authorised by the English court on a case by case basis), the judge decided that the welfare of the child (known only as 'L') was the paramount consideration.

Mr Justice Hedley ruled that legal changes last year now (for the first time) weight the balance between public policy and the welfare of the child decisively in favour of welfare except in the clearest case of abuse of public policy. He authorised the British parents' commercial payment to their surrogate and awarded them legal parenthood. In doing so, he highlighted the legal difficulties surrounding re-entry into the UK after the birth, the need for intended parents to grapple with immigration control and the continuing lack of availability of good quality information. He warned that the court would continue to police the public policy concerns and scrutinise the issue of payments carefully. He also added that the legal criteria had been 'fully met' by the 'most careful and conscientious parents' in this case.

The Telegraph covered the Re L case running front page headlines the following day entitled 'Childless couple win the right to pay surrogate mothers large sums of money to have babies for them' and voiced right wing concern about children being treated as 'commodities to be bought and sold' and the opening of floodgates.

The British parents in Re L gave an anonymous statement to the Telegraph in response explaining that 'we entered into this surrogacy arrangement after a great deal of thought and research, having exhausted all other options for having a family, and following years of fertility treatment and several miscarriages' and that 'our surrogate is a wonderful person who is now very much part of our family and will be part of our and our child's lives going forward. She gave us the most incredible life-changing gift which we will be forever grateful for'.

Having advised hundreds of people undertaking surrogacy, I know that they do so with great care and thought after years of heartbreak. Historically, many of these parents would have struggled or even failed to achieve much wanted families for a number of reasons, including medical problems or sexual orientation. Changes to the law last year have opened up surrogacy to unmarried and same-sex couples (where previously only married couples could obtain legal parenthood for their surrogate born child through the courts) and this has increased the pool of people now embracing surrogacy as a family building option.

Surrogacy is steadily becoming part of public consciousness fuelled by media coverage, the Internet and celebrity endorsement by the likes of Elton John and Sarah Jessica Parker. There is, as a result, increasingly a social and cultural sea change in the building and fabric of UK family life which challenges historical perceptions and the legal and political landscape regardless of the current legal restrictions. Those British people that cannot (or choose not to) embark upon surrogacy in the UK will cross borders to foreign surrogacy friendly destinations including US states such as Illinois and California and can lawfully do so.

Surrogacy raises sensitive issues and there is unlikely to be a quick fix. However, the current law often leaves surrogate born children and their intended parents in legal limbo, without the necessary legal status and protection they need. Parents must navigate a legal minefield and a lengthy court process at a time when they need to meet the challenges of parenthood and adjust to family life with a newborn baby.

The law is complex and was historically created to give legal parenthood to married couples undergoing IVFIVF with donor egg or sperm. In surrogacy cases the law gives legal parenthood to the surrogate parents and treats intended parents as egg and sperm donors. Single people are barred in law from obtaining parental orders from the court (the legal solution for surrogacy) to become their child's legal parent and intended mothers have no legal entitlement to maternity leave to care for their child placing additional strain on families.

In worst case scenario, surrogate children born abroad to British intended parents can be stateless and parentless as the X&Y case graphically illustrated and risk being stranded abroad and unable to enter the UK. Whilst the recent legal changes and the Re L case represent a step forward in the balance of public policy versus payments, the ongoing media debate and obvious sensitivities surrounding surrogacy remain very real and there is still much work to be done to overcome these issues and difficulties.

Article: 10th January 2011 appeared in Bionews 590 by Louisa Ghevaert Partner at Gamble and Ghevaert LLP www.gambleandghevaert.com

Read more about surrogacy, gay parenting and looking for an egg donor at www.prideangel.com