SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for SoyCow4408
Their Mothers Chose Donor Sperm. The Doctors Used Their Own.
Scores of people born through artificial insemination have learned from DNA tests that their biological fathers were the doctors who performed the procedure.
Growing up in Nacogdoches, Tex., Eve Wiley learned at age 16 that she had been conceived through artificial insemination with donor sperm.
Her mother, Margo Williams, now 65, had sought help from Dr. Kim McMorries, telling him that her husband was infertile. She asked the doctor to locate a sperm donor. He told Mrs. Williams that he had found one through a sperm bank in California.
Mrs. Williams gave birth to a daughter, Eve. Now 32, Ms. Wiley is a stay-at-home mother in Dallas. In 2017 and 2018, like tens of millions of Americans, she took consumer DNA tests.
The results? Her biological father was not a sperm donor in California, as she had been told — Dr. McMorries was. The news left Ms. Wiley reeling.
"You build your whole life on your genetic identity, and that's the foundation," Ms. Wiley said. "But when those bottom bricks have been removed or altered, it can be devastating."
Through his attorney and the staff at his office, Dr. McMorries declined to comment.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Wednesday August 28 2019, @11:03PM (9 children)
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 29 2019, @01:52AM
Not so fast: it's only legal in certain rural counties in Nevada where almost nobody lives.
It is totally illegal everywhere else.
(Score: 2) by dry on Friday August 30 2019, @04:48AM (7 children)
Being illegal to buy is still illegal, it just changes who gets charged with the crime.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Friday August 30 2019, @09:00AM (6 children)
Still illegal are sex with minors (lack of capacity to consent) and non-consensual sex (in other words, if at any time the woman changes her mind), as well as running a whorehouse. The Supreme Court recognizes the reality of the sex trade, and that keeping it illegal discriminated against women by placing them in a situation where they needed "protection " from the law, making them vulnerable to sexploitation.
It's still a gross, grubby way to survive, but criminalizing it was just making matters worse, same as the war on drugs, both providing easy money for the courts and prisons but not fixing anything.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by dry on Friday August 30 2019, @03:03PM (5 children)
Harper's government made so many things illegal about prostitution that it is de facto illegal. From wiki,
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 31 2019, @12:50AM (2 children)
Sounds clear to me: the only kind of prostitution that is legal is "call girl."
These are the kind that are discreet and don't cause problems.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by dry on Saturday August 31 2019, @01:25AM
Basically. Also the minimum to be Constitutional, if that. The law was changed due to the Supreme Court ruling that it was unconstitutional for prostitution to be illegal.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Tuesday September 10 2019, @06:39PM
The problem with the new law is that it's also illegal because, while it doesn't prohibit women selling sex, it prohibits men purchasing sex, running afoul of the Charter prohibition of discrimination based on sex.
Everyone knows it, so if the prosecutors can't bluff someone into a quiet plea bargain, nothing happens.
There's enough real crime with real victims related to the sex trade (child prostitution, human trafficing) that it's a serious misallocation of resources to go after consensual sex between adults where nobody is harmed.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Tuesday September 10 2019, @06:31PM (1 child)
It hasn't been illegal to sell sex for money for decades, and every time the government tries to outlaw it, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms says "Nope, you can't make that illegal - it's a law that discriminates against women."
Harper's legislation (as mentioned in the wike) still doesn't criminalize sex work. Quoting from the same wikipedia article:
The prohibitions against purchasing sex services target Johns, not sex workers, and as such aren't falling foul of the Charter by discriminating against women.
The prohibition against advertising is ignored on a daily basis - just look at the classified advertising in all the free local newspapers. Everyone knows what "type of massage" is being sold.
The prohibition on living on the material benefits of sex work is targeted at pimps and madames, not the sex workers themselves (which still enjoy protection of the Charter because making it illegal to live off your own sex work would be discriminatory).
In other words, Harper's changes didn't change anything - sex work is still legal. Always has been, always will be.
Police have changed their approach. Now they're looking for human trafficers, pimps of underage girls (the Canadian Grand Prix in Montreal is basically a snog-fest with people all over the world coming for cheap and easily accessible sex. Plenty of them want under-age girls, so the police concentrate on that).
Nobody should have to sell their bodies for sex with someone they find gross, disgusting, unappealing, etc., but poverty, drug addiction, and lack of opportunities is a symptom of a bigger problem, not THE problem.
Same as nobody should have to sell their organs or their blood to survive (we work on a voluntary blood and organ transplant basis here. I've donated blood more than 30 times, and offered up a directed donation of a kidney and chunk of liver which it turned out the patient was not healthy enough to benefit from transplants).
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by dry on Wednesday September 11 2019, @04:23AM
I admit that I'm mostly going on memory, namely that Harper did his best to illegalize prostitution, and making it illegal to buy has the same affect as making it illegal to sell and his final law wasn't much better. I haven't hung out with any prostitutes in a long time, perhaps pre-charter. I do agree with what you say and thanks for the correction.