There probably needs to be more regulation around this area, given the growth of IVF services. Asking another parent to maintain contact with you is a pretty big ask, and often isn't practical, and though it seems the donee parent agreed it also sounds like there's more to this story. I mean, this woman has clearly gone to the media and has "stumbled across" photos of the baby, which indicates she was probably in fact looking for them. There's more to this, in my opinion. The fact she's saying things like "pass the child off as her own" disturbs me. This baby is not the donor's child. She's not its parent "with conditions", whatever the donee mother agreed to. I doubt it's as simple as it sounds.

Clearly this donor had certain expectations of the donee and future child, but the whole scenario sounds like a good example of why when donating, biological parents ought to be better counselled and ought to be giving up all future rights. What is the point of the donor even pursing the other family? Is she going to sue for visitation? Custody? If she does, is that really in the child's interests? What if the donee had a good reason not to want contact? What if the donor is a total fruit loop? What if she had very different ideas on how much of a relationship was going to happen, to the donee - who sounds like she was imagining a few photos and maybe a visit here and there. What if the donor wanted much more contact than the other family were comfortable with? Is she verging on wanting to live vicariously through someone else's child here? And what about things like nightmarish logistics? What if someone moves? Wants to attend frequent visits? Wants a say in upbringing? It sounds somewhat extreme, I know, but these sorts of cases do happen. Just because the two women had a vague agreement doesn't mean that agreement was workable.

Another thing to consider is with embryos, donation like this isn't uncommon. Women often have some remaining after they've had all the children they wish to, and agree to make those embryos in case any of their desired pregnancies don't stick. Donation often occurs at the point where the family have decided against future children, don't wish to continue to pay to store the embryos, but also don't want them destroyed. And while gifting the embryos is a lovely thing to do, the public interest in having donor material available probably outweighs the desire for the future child or donor to have a personal connection beyond knowing a detailed medical history. I don't think it's inappropriate to "gift" embryos with conditions, no matter what a desperate infertile family is willing to agree to - because for some women who may have lost multiple pregnancies, they could be in a very, very vulnerable place when offered a donation, and may agree to contact without really grasping the possible consequences.

I'm not saying any of this is what happened, but the donee could have been in a position where she agreed and later reconsidered - perhaps based on getting to know the donor better, perhaps based on another reason - perhaps she did just want to avoid contact and lied and took advantage of the situation. But the article seems to paint a very negative picture of a poor jilted donor who chose this woman and obviously expected a great deal out of the relationship - in my opinion, perhaps far too much. I know some have said the donee shouldn't have accepted unless she was happy with the conditions, but perhaps the donor shouldn't have donated unless she was happy for someone else to have and raise her child. This is not her kid: I don't think she should have any rights to assert here, and I think this sort of donation should only happen when donor parents give embryos on that understanding. A relationship should be optional, and up to the people who will actually be raising the child.