Is Sperm Like Any Other Commodity?

Banked, bought, sold, stolen -- now, accountable to product liability laws

By Susannah F. Locke Posted 05.04.2009 at 5:30 pm 9 Comments

Human Sperm "Yes, they really were chasing around someone dressed in an egg costume." celebdu (CC licensed)

Our sperm and eggs give us one of the greatest responsibilities on the planet: the potential to generate new life, to put forth onto the Earth another living, breathing, thinking, feeling being. Or, they can be sold for a buck.

The business of science-aided conception leads to some intriguing legal issues. Our news search unearthed reports on lost embryos, secret sperm switcheroos, and at least one case of a man claiming the regrettable placement of a security camera in his sperm donation room.

But nothing shows the current position of sperm as a tradable commodity like a judge's decision earlier this month that a girl could sue the sperm bank that helped create her under product liability laws.

Genetic tests had shown that 13-year-old Brittany Donovan had inherited fragile X syndrome from her biological father (or at least, from her biological father's sperm). Fragile X is a genetic disorder that causes mental impairment, from learning disabilities to retardation.

The girl's lawyer explained to the press that, under New York law, he doesn't have to prove that the sperm bank was negligent, just that the "product" was harmful. Just like faulty brakes or a malfunctioning power tool.

Even with maximal care while screening sperm donors, there's always a chance that the one lucky sperm that won the race to the egg acquired some random mutation when it was produced back in the testes. A mom and dad with perfectly healthy X chromosomes can make a baby with fragile X the old-fashioned way, so is there any reason to expect sperm donation to be different?

I turn it over to you, PopSci readers. The laws that exempt blood transfusions and other tissues from product liability laws vary from state to state. Should laws protect sperm banks and egg donation clinics from product liability? Or is there something inherently wrong with expecting Mother Nature to perform with the perfection of a machine?

Previous Article: Merck and Elsevier Create "Peer-Reviewed" Advertorial

Next Article: Pandemics That Were And Weren’t

Want to learn more about breakthroughs in electronics, medicine, nanotech, and more?
Subscribe to Popular Science today, for less than $1 per issue!

9 Comments

Link to this comment

ford2go

05/05/09 at 3:04 am

What an amazing concept. The judge ruled that the suit should happen in a state where the law would not protect the sperm bank.

However, the girl was 'conceived' in a state where the law would tend to protect the sperm bank.

Product liability for something sperm shouldn't even be a consderation, unless the sperm could be analyzed with a reasonably high degree of accuracy.

But, allowing the suit to be moved to a more favorable location -- unbelievable.

Link to this comment

Oakspar77777

05/05/09 at 2:21 pm

It seems to me that she has no case. She IS the sperm, (50% of her is, at least) meaning that she is the harmful product. Is half of her genome going to sue the other half?

That, or the sperm company could say that by selecting to be the deformed sperm, rather than the healthy, she was using the product in a way other than intended.

At best, the mother who purchased the product would have the best claim, not the daughter, who has benefitted from the product. (Since without the product, she would not be alive at all, it seems that fragile X would be an acceptable side affect for a medical product that prevents, if not death, certainly "nonexistance.")

Now, if the mother had bought sperm screened to remove donors with a certain genetic condition, and such a donor had bypassed the screening and passed on said condition, then the MOTHER would have a case, since she did not recieve what she purchased.

Link to this comment

brucethebrat

06/26/09 at 2:43 pm

As a Canadian we often laugh at the crazy law suits in the US. Doesn't anybody ever take responsibility with their own actions?

Change the laws to not allow frivolous lawsuits and outlaw lawyers working for contingency fees.

How can a sperm donor know if one little swimmer might have a defect? If this suit is successful all sperm banks would shut down.

Link to this comment

BaPef

11/25/09 at 5:12 pm

I'm sorry but Just because of this the Sperm Bank should petition to allow for abortions in the 13th year, the girl should be aborted and the lawyer shot for milking that family for money like he is.

Link to this comment

BaPef

11/25/09 at 5:12 pm

Thats a joke by the way

Link to this comment

bob4uonly

11/19/10 at 2:34 am

Really it's good i like it...
www.bestonlinegenericdrugs.com

Link to this comment

mikekemp

11/21/10 at 10:56 pm

The biological father may not have known of the defect and if he did then this is certainly neglect, but gee this is a form of human behavior that is so distasteful on both fronts. When we consider the lengths that individuals go to give birth to a child and then it becomes, to me like a commodity and if we are not perfect then we can sue, is outrageous thinking.

Regards
Mike Kemp
www.houstonfertilitysolutions.com

Link to this comment

soodsoi

11/26/10 at 8:48 am

Link to this comment

psciz

05/30/11 at 12:24 am

It seems to come down to a matter of "delivery". If the girl's father and mother were married, had sex, and she was born with this condition, could she sue her father? I would hope not. This is no different. Only if malevolent intent on the part of the father to knowingly inflict this condition on his child could be proven would there be any sort of logical reason to hold him "responsible".

Science

+ More Photo Galleries

June 2013: American Energy Independence

Five amazing, clean technologies that will set us free, in this month's energy-focused issue. Also: how to build a better bomb detector, the robotic toys that are raising your children, a human catapult, the world's smallest arcade, and much more.