Dividing biological siblings to solve adult infertility is child abuse and exploitation

Modi

Truth and Justice

Whose stateless child survivor would you rather be – ISIS or international IVF/Surrogacy? Or neither?

Whose stateless child would you rather be – ISIS or international IVF/Surrogacy?

By umvtogether / September 20, 2015

Equal IVF Child Rights

Dear Friends and Fellow Americans,

1) Have international IVF/surrogacy laws (maybe through UN?) to protect and ensure equal HUMAN rights treatment for each participant in an IVF cycle including donors, surrogates and innocent IVF children.

It is understood that the US Immigration Laws are an internal matter to the US but US is a world leader and we expect nothing less than strong leadership and support for equal rights for innocent IVF children and IVF families from the US. This is about CHILD RIGHTS. This is about HUMAN RIGHTS. The same bioethical reasons why human cloning is banned, placing innocent IVF children in a LEGAL LIMBO is wrong; they did not ask to be born. Do car manufacturers make cars that cannot be driven on the road safely? Then why does IVF industry "produce" IVF babies that are placed in LEGAL LIMBO?

2) The US Immigration law for IVF parents who are US citizens:
We are asking for two changes in US Immigration Law (7 FAM 1131.4 and 7 FAM 1131.5 and its sub-sections) that deals with IVF :
a) Change the phrase from "biological mother/father" to "parent".
b) Change the phrase from "child born out of wedlock" to "child born". If IVF children are "born out of wedlock" during a marriage, then what is the validity of the marriage? It gets very confusing and seems the laws are contradictory. If IVF children are deemed to be "born out of wedlock", are we implicitly taking away their legal rights of being "born in a marriage"? For example, a sister's legal right to grow up with a brother or a brother's legal right to grow up with a sister?
3) The applicable US Immigration law for IVF fathers on US green card: We are asking for a change of one word - from "mother" to "parent" as cited in 9 FAM 42.1 N2.1 and 9 FAM 42.1 N1.1. This would allow an IVF father legally on US green card to bring a child born outside the US though an egg donor and surrogate and thus have “NO LEGAL MOTHER” to meet US law requirements.

4) Family Laws – If a US couple has an ongoing IVF pregnancy, it must be mandatory to declare the IVF pregnancy to the court like a natural pregnancy in the event of a divorce so that the BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD can be ascertained by the court. Suppressing information from the court is a crime. The rights of an innocent IVF child in a foreign country of a US couple are directly placed in a LEGAL LIMBO.

5) Left-behind IVF child law - The needs of an IVF child are NO DIFFERENT than a natural born child. An IVF child also needs love, care, clothes, food, shelter, books, toys, education, and so on. If an intended parent abandons an IVF pregnancy or IVF child in a foreign country, they should be held accountable and responsible because the IVF child’s needs are EQUAL. If female foeticide or female infanticide is a crime, why is abandoning an IVF child NOT a crime or have NO LEGAL repurcusions? Is an IVF child LESS of a child than a natural born child? An IVF child is not an unwanted pregnancy but a deliberate pregnancy to bring an innocent life into this world. Why abandon with NO accountability or responsibility?

6) Legal recourse for lapses – In cases where the fertility clinic lapses like accidentally swapping samples there should be a legal recourse. In this case, a DNA test would be negative but what if the intended parents still want to bring an IVF child born outside the US back to the US and raise them? It is traumatic enough to deal with infertility and the trauma only continues when there are serious lapses like switching samples of the biological parent.

7) Debate on Parentage – Define clearly on parentage of the child including issuance of legal documents like birth certificate. A valid birth certificate is a fundamental right of the CHILD and not the parents. It is a document that the child carries for life including adulthood. As the technology evolves, (Link Is : "Three-Parent IVF" Up For Public Consultation In Britain : http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/250343.php) it is possible to have a “three parent IVF child” where the DNA is from three parents. What will be the legal impact of this?

8) Public Service –
a) Just like there are public service announcements through radio advertisements, etc. to educate and spread awareness about adoption and its legalities, there should be similar public service campaigns for IVF families.

b) Just like there are travel advisories for US citizens to risky regions, there should be IVF/surrogacy advisories for US citizens of countries that uphold basic IVF child rights and basic human rights of the IVF industry like donors and surrogates.

[signature]