|
| |
Children Are the Losers In This
Sexual Revolution
GILLIAN BOWDITCH
6 May 2003
THE natural course of the human mind may indeed range from credulity to
skepticism, as Thomas Jefferson wryly observed, but these days the
natural course of the average newspaper readerıs mind veers from
boggle-eyed amazement to slack-jawed horror.
Belief didnıt have to be suspended so much as expelled indefinitely
yesterday. No sooner had we swallowed the story: "Scotlandıs cricketers
enjoy winning debut" than we were reading about the current vogue for
Blue Nun wine and marveling over the ingenuity of the masked Japanese
politician who is moonlighting as a wrestling porn star.
After that, the antics of William Wotherspoon, a former soldier with the
Parachute Regiment, seemed almost pedestrian. Mr. Wotherspoon, a father
of four, underwent a full sex-change operation at the Nuffield Hospital
in Sussex and changed his name to Lisa-Anne Docherty. So far, so
conventional; just an everyday story of gender realignment in
Lanarkshire.
Before the operation, however, he met Lisa-Marie Barraclough and decided
to have another baby. When natural conception failed, Wotherspoon bought
a plastic syringe, a fridge with an accurate temperature control and 18
little plastic phials in which to store his sperm samples. He then went
ahead with the sex-change operation. After five attempts to impregnate
herself with the contents of the fridge, Barraclough became pregnant and
give birth to a daughter in Wishaw General Hospital seven weeks ago.
The baby, it has been decided, is to call Barraclough "mummy" and
Wotherspoon "maddy", an amalgam of mummy and daddy. Confused? That is
nothing to what the child is likely to feel when she poses the
inevitable
question: "Where do babies come from, maddy?"
The Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority is expected to
investigate the case, which throws up more ethical dilemmas than a
delegation of bishops at an Anne Summers party. It is illegal to freeze
sperm or human eggs without a licence. There is, however, no law against
storing your genetic material alongside the Lurpak and the leftover
chicken in the fridge.
There may, of course, be more to this story than meets the eye.
Wotherspoon was spared a jail sentence to allow his sex-change operation
to go ahead, and some medical experts have doubted his paternity. Even
assuming it is true, and Wotherspoon says he is prepared to undergo a
DNA test to prove it, it sounds like an outlandish story.
But this is not a unique case. One London fertility clinic is already
routinely inviting transsexuals to store their sperm prior to surgery, a
service 90 per cent of men undergoing the operation say they would use.
Professor Gedis Grudzinskas, of the London Bridge Clinic, believes
transsexuals should be given the opportunity to father children once
they become women as a matter of course.
Professor Paul De Sutter, who runs the infertility clinic at Ghent
University Hospital, Belgium, goes further: "It may even be our duty as
healthcare professionals to help transsexual people fulfill their wish
for children." If this means finding a surrogate mother to carry the
baby, he says, so be it. "These men want to preserve their ability to
procreate," he declares.
Assisted conception is rapidly becoming the modern equivalent of the
freak show, with the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority
expected to adjudicate in cases which make the family life of Oedipus
look benign.
Last year, Glasgow Sheriff Court had to rule on a disturbing paternity
battle involving two lesbians and a homosexual donor father. Man Not
Included, the first internet sperm donor service for lesbians and single
women, will deliver sperm to your door for £680. Demand is high; over
4,000 women have registered with the site.
In the quest for personal fulfillment, genetic material is traded over
the internet, mixed in surgical dishes and available to anyone
irrespective of age, sex or motive as long as they can pay. It is left
to the courts to sort out the mess.
At the heart of the matter is the selfish determination of a generation
to pursue any lifestyle it chooses irrespective of the cost to society
as a whole. If you worship at the cult of the individual, however, the
gods demand sacrifice and that sacrifice is increasingly being paid by
children.
They are the main losers in the social and sexual revolution which has
taken place in Britain since the war. Prior to the Fifties, when the
concept of childrenıs rights was unknown, most children could expect to
be raised by both biological parents, an upbringing which countless
studies have shown gives them the best chances in life. Now, when,
childrenıs rights are invoked against everything from the wearing of
school uniform to the sitting of exams, children are increasingly at the
mercy of a society intent on promoting adultsı interests at their
expense. We are championing the wrong rights.
Children can be separated from a biological parent, split up from their
siblings, removed from their school, denied access to grandparents, made
to accept a complete stranger as a surrogate parent and moved to another
part of the country without consultation or warning.
We choose to ignore these uncomfortable facts because we know life isnıt
perfect, because we have made these agonizing decisions ourselves or
have sympathized with friends who have done so. We turn away quickly
from the uncomfortable news that there has been a 50 per cent rise in
referrals to the childrenıs panel of children suffering from parental
neglect.
Now science has reduced babies to the status of commodities. Your
partner may be gay, dead or non-existent, but that will not preclude
your right to procreate.
There is no doubt that in-vitro fertilization has been a huge force for
good and has brought happiness to thousands. One in every 80 children
born in Britain is believed to be an IVF baby. Most are raised in loving
homes by parents who have their best interests at heart.
It is equally true that the intentions which have brought us to the
point where children conceived in the laboratory can be raised by people
who may not be their legal guardian, may not be a blood relative and may
not have their welfare at heart, are noble. Equality and
non-discrimination, the twin creeds of modern society, must be obeyed.
Heterosexual or homosexual, married or single, over 50 or under 50, in a
stable relationship or a casual one, everybody has the right to
parenthood. But of course there is discrimination. Those discriminated
against are the children who have no guarantee of a stable childhood or
of life with a biological parent and who end up reliant on the courts to
sort out their basic identity.
The fact that some children conceived naturally face similar problems
does not make this laissez-faire attitude a desirable model. It is 13
years since the Human Fertilization and Embryology Act was passed and
since then the technology has advanced so rapidly that the law has not
been able to keep up, as one disturbing court case after another has
demonstrated.
When weıve reached a point where infertility professors claim to have a
duty to help transsexual men become both mother and father to a child,
it is clearly time to toughen the guidelines. The prospect of a regiment
of sex-changed maddies is stretching our credulity a bit too far.
|