The SCIENTIST or the STORK?

Cue (NZERS), Issue 22, 30 April 1945, Page 15

The SCIENTIST or the STORK?

: HE tragedy of the childless marJ ried couple who yearn for children and. are physically incapable of having them is not only a pathetic one but is a contributing factor in the dwindling populations of the Englishspeaking races. It is being solved in a few cases by adoption, but this is not always a happy or satisfying solution. An answer to the problem has been provided in the United States where the artificial breeding of human infants, the mother never seeing the father, is being carried out. It is an answer that is not acceptable to many people, but it may, like many other sweeping reforms, come to be adopted as a commonplace occurrence.

There are numerous cases in New Zealand of married couples who are childless because of the sterility of the husband. It is the wife in such a partnership who is the logical subject for treatment. In America, such a woman deriving artificially induced pregnancy must 'undergo thorough tests, mental as well as physical. Family history is scanned for hereditary deformities, and if the results of these investigations prove satisfactory the childless wife is regarded as being suitable for help. But before insemination is carried out, the doctor insists that both the wife and the husband sign a document that the wife requests artificial insemination and the husband consents. Not only is the document signed, but it is finger-printed, after which it i s deposited in a vault known 2, y to the doctor and his assistant. e reason for this precaution will be explained later.

The selection of the male donor is carefully carried out, and when finally chosen he is submitted to a severe test. He is selected from a middle-age group and must be free from structural defects, venereal disease, epileptic heredity and family taint of insanity. In America it is insisted that the donor is a college graduate and has attained success in his chosen career. - The, donors are not paid, for it is desired that they are motivated by an interest in genetics rather than dollars. Doctors; refuse requests that the husband’s brother should act as donor in case of later emotional complications, but they .are careful to select a man from the same race stock as the legal father and one with the same dominant physical' characteristics. This is to avoid a' clash between the growing child, who perhaps is of French heredity, and the legal father who may be of Prussian* stock. Moreover, if the child showed different racial colouring from the parents a certain psychological irritation might develop.

Naturally, the identity of the donor is kept hidden from the mother, and vice versa. It would he disastrous for any one of the three concerned in the little drama to obtain a clue as to one another’s identity. It would provide too many complications and could easily give rise to blackmail. There is no need for such a complication to arise. Hospitalization for both donor and mother is recommended as an aid to secrecy, but there Is no need for them to be admitted to the same hospital. The paternal fluid can be kept in an ordinary refrigerator, at between

40 and 50 degrees, for several days without losing its potency. The actual artificial insemination is very simply performed, but lit is considered that the surgeon who carries it out should not be the obstetrician in attendance at the baby’s birth. If the doctor is unaware of the unusual circumstances of the pregnancy, he can in good faith make out the baby’s ‘birth certificate naming the husband as father.

The legal side of the question is an interesting one. The consent document acts as a safeguard to the wife should the husband file suit for divorce on the grounds that his wife had a child when he could prove that he had been sterile throughout his married life. Then again is the child born in wedlock as a result of artificial insemination legitimate in the eyes of the law? The answer is in the affirmative, for a child born in wedlock is automatically accepted as legitimate.

Psychologically, it is claimed, arti-

ficially induced pregnancy has much to commend it in many cases. The desire to bear children is a strong one in most women. In the case of a woman who is denied child-bearing because of the sterility of her husband much harm can be done to her mental health.

Adoption of someone else’s child does not always meet the case. The wife yearns for a child of her own flesh and bleedso much so that her husband’s inability to remove that ever-present want becomes a reproach and may turn a successful marriage into a failure. Artificial insemination, carried out with the care and understanding that are being shown by medical men in Britain and America, is regarded as a solution to the matter.

The subject of artificial breeding of babies has naturally brought forth a torrent of opposition and criticism. Every revolutionary change has. To many people the subject is a little re-, volting. Certain high church dignitaries have condemned it in no uncertain terms. There is no intention here to commend or condemn it. But it should be remembered that it is being applied successfully and with suitable secrecy in America and Britain. It is a service that is there for the childless coppies who desire it. It is not being forced upon them. Conservative people may condemn it as immoral or unnatural, but it does provide a woman with a way to fulfill one of her main functions in life, child-bearing, which otherwise would have been denied her.

Most people are opposed to great change. There are istill too many who cannot face the publicity given to such subjects as birth control, sex education and venereal disease without a shudder of disgust or embarrassment. Today, one cannot afford to be narrow and old-fashioned in one’s views. Tolerance and breadth of vision are required in coping with the social, economic, and political changes the world is .undergoing at present and which it W1 continue to undergo in the next tew decades. Artificial insemination for childless couples is but one of many calling for consideration that is fre from prejudice and bigotry.