Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for the reply. I will take a look again at the positioning of things. I will request to withdraw the amendments, by leave of the House, in a moment.

I will make some quick points that are relevant here and I might ask the Minister a question. It is well worth our considering what the obligations of a donor should be where a person gives their own gametes for use in assisted human reproduction, including, but not confined to, surrogacy arrangements? As I have said already in this House, I believe a child should not intentionally be deprived of the society of, a relationship with, and the responsibility to them from, any person who has a genetic link with them or, indeed, a mother who carries them to birth. I believe that is an obligation to the child because, in the vast majority of circumstances, aside from rape or sexual abuse situations, the giving of one’s gametes in the creation of a new life is a voluntary act. We mature human beings should live with the consequences of our actions. That is core to being mature and grown up. To me, there is something fundamentally wrong with promoting or enabling an attitude that a person can give up their gametes, their own genetic identity, and know that those gametes will be used in the engendering – if that is the correct word – of a child and then have no responsibilities in regard to that. Now of course, that is the logic of the brave new world we have entered into and not just with this legislation but previously with recognition of the begetting of children using donor gametes.It is a matter of essential truth and natural law that where a person voluntarily or willingly allows their gametes to be used in the bringing of children into the world, they should have responsibilities. I do not know why all those sperm donors are from Nordic countries; I hope there is nothing racist involved in those particular choices, but who knows? It is not for those of us who oppose it to have to worry too much about what is going on or why people choose donors from particular countries. However, if people understood that the donation of their gametes could carry civil consequences for them, for example, that any child born of their gametes might have a right to some provision by them in the future, then people might have second thoughts about donating their gametes, or indeed selling them, as undoubtedly happens. There is a real question about what the obligations of an egg or sperm donor should be. There may be circumstances where they should not be held to have some responsibility towards a child. However, I cannot think of any such circumstances where they freely and voluntarily enable their gametes to be used in the bringing of children into the world.

While we are talking about donors, that raises the issue of what we consider appropriate or who we consider appropriate to bring children into the world? In the normal course of human events it is not something we need to engage with because people do what comes naturally and children are born as a result. However, where we legislate and presume to regulate the process whereby children are brought into the world - we give thanks for that little voice I can hear in the Chamber that was brought into the world at some point in the not-too-distant past - it is certainly appropriate to ask about the past of that person and what the intentions of that person might be. I will return to that issue, if I may, later on, in the context of amendment No. 15, which has already been briefly discussed.