The donor-conceived Menno Hofman and the Christian ethics professor Henk Jochemsen debate about sperm donation.
The donor-conceived Menno Hofman and the Christian ethics professor Henk Jochemsen debate about sperm donation.
Hofman himself was conceived from donor sperm, too. And he has "roughly 25" donor children apart from the direct three in his own family.
Hofman is a Christian theologian. His ethical motive is in helping other people, especially intended parents who long for a child.
Henk Jochemsen is very sceptical about the practice of sperm donation. He thinks it speaks against the Biblical model in which parenthood is a unity, not just a selected act of giving sperm.
Apart from that, he thinks there is a risk of inbreeding, since the half-brothers and -sisters do not know each other.
Evert van Vlastuin
[00:12] Welcome at the CNE podcast. My name is Evert van Vlastuin and I will take you to talks about dilemmas and challenges for Christians in Europe. Today we speak about artificial reproductive technology or more specific sperm donation.
[00:34] More and more people nowadays have to live with the knowledge that the father in the house they grew up is not the real father or not the biological father. But they are the son or a daughter of a sperm donor.
[00:50] And one of them is with us today in our studio, Menno Hofman. Menno, welcome in the CNE podcast.
Menno Hofman
[00:58] Thank you for inviting me.
Evert van Vlastuin
[01:00] How did you discover that you are donor conceived?
Menno Hofman
[01:04] I heard that from my mother. She told me when I was 17 years old.
Evert van Vlastuin
[01:08] And how long is that ago?
Menno Hofman
[01:10] I'm now 43, so that's quite some years now.
Evert van Vlastuin
[01:13] Yeah, 26 years, yes. And how was that for you, that you heard that you are a donor child or a donor conceived child? Well, being donor conceived for me is not a big issue.
Menno Hofman
[01:28] The issue was that my mother was in tears and it could all have been avoided if they would have been open from the start. So I understand why they did it back then because the doctor, Dr. Levy who helped them, he also wrote a book so I
[01:47] could have the luxury which most donor conceived do not have, but I could read back also his way of doing donor conception and yeah.
Evert van Vlastuin
[02:00] So your mother gave the book and said well...
Menno Hofman
[02:02] No no no because Dr. Leif was very inclined on secrecy, stressed that again and again so they burned the book which you had to do that to avoid that donor conceived could find out that they are donor conceived. Because his belief was that if a donor conceived does not know that they're donor conceived they can never suffer from it. So even if it may be difficult for the parents, they should still keep it secret. That was his
Evert van Vlastuin
[02:35] philosophy. Yeah. Well, here on the table are several books about stories, life stories, people, donor-conceived people. And one of the things I read there was that many of them had a sort of unsettled feeling before they found out. Do you recognize that? An unsettled feeling before you were 17? No, I had absolutely no clue at all. You thought that the father in the house was
[03:04] your real father? My genetic father as well, yeah. So it was actually a surprise? Yeah,
Menno Hofman
[03:11] it was definitely a surprise. But in itself it was more neutral in that sense that I was not not feeling positive or negative so much except then for the fact that my mother had to endure
[03:25] this kind of stress because the tears were not only tears from the stress at that moment but also showed some of the suffering which could have been avoided if they could have been more open
[03:40] from the start and I understand why they didn't do it that back then but with the knowledge of today, which is also always easy. I would advise everyone to be open from the
Evert van Vlastuin
[03:53] start if you do it. We come back to that later. Also with us is Henk Jochemsen, Emeritus Professor in Medical Ethics and also in Christian Philosophy in the Netherlands. Welcome Henk.
[04:05] Thank you. Are you donor conceived too? Not as far as I know. How could you know?
Henk Jochemsen
[04:12] I think that if that would have been the case I wouldn't be able to find out because it would be in the time when there was secrecy. Yeah. You were born in which year? 52. 52. Yeah and that
[04:26] was exactly the time when this technique came up. Yeah. In the 50s in the journals of I've seen journals of those time of the protestant physicians and roman catholic physicians where these issues were discussed and normally quite critically.
[04:45] So, I know I'm from a family of five children and we are too much all the same in many respects to have different donors or whatever, or even the same.
[04:59] So, no, that's not the issue for me.
Evert van Vlastuin
[05:03] Could you imagine yourself to be a sperm donor?
Henk Jochemsen
[05:09] I can imagine that, but I don't think I would want it. I have ethical problems with donor conception but let me start by saying that this has nothing
[05:25] to do with the value and the dignity of people who are burned that way.
Evert van Vlastuin
[05:30] Right, so you mean...
Henk Jochemsen
[05:31] No, what I want to say is that talking about an ethical issue with somebody who is immediately involved personally is very sensitive. And this very, if you,
[05:47] same with other techniques, for example, mothers, IVF and embryo donation, I mean, there are many techniques nowadays. And when it concerns people that are in the same room
[06:01] when you talk about it, it may feel as if they should not have existed. That issue is not on the table. All people are equal, all are created in the image of God, all have the same dignity, and
[06:15] irrespective of the origin. So what I have ethical objections to the technique, that is not an objection to the persons who are conceiving. It may be an objection to the behavior of people who act consciously as a donor.
[06:33] But that's the difference. That's not on the person, that's on a certain behavior. And ethics deals with behavior.
Evert van Vlastuin
[06:40] Well, let's check that with Menno. Can you accept that Henk says, I have objections to the technique, but no objections to you personally. Can you accept that?
Menno Hofman
[06:51] Yeah, I think that makes sense. And it's also something I think many churches will have to deal with because they will have multiple people in their congregation. Some of them may also be donor conceived and while other may be not in favor of using this technique.
[07:10] I think you have to find ways of dealing with differences in a respectful way. I think it's also one of the things Paul in the Bible describes very well. That's regarding the eating of meat.
[07:25] And then he describes how you should deal with people who believe differently. And those that believe that you can eat this meat, they should treat the others who believe you shouldn't do that with respect and the other way around.
Evert van Vlastuin
[07:39] Yeah, the Christian freedom.
Menno Hofman
[07:40] Yeah, it's kind of a freedom which he describes. And a way of dealing with differences in a respectful way. And it also shows how difficult it is. Because Paul himself, he calls it like weak belief. If you believe it, you're not allowed to eat this meat.
[07:59] So it's also kind of a judgment. So he tries to encourage people not to judge, but actually does himself. So it shows how difficult it is. And I think that's kind of the beauty of Paul that he describes it this way.
Evert van Vlastuin
[08:19] Yeah. I asked Hank, could you imagine yourself being a sperm donor? Could you imagine yourself being a sperm donor?
Menno Hofman
[08:26] Well, I did become a sperm donor, actually. And I imagined it before I heard being donor conceived. Less than two weeks before, we had a course in school which called religion.
[08:39] One very small topic was donor conception. And then I heard about it and I thought, well, how would I feel if I were donor conceived? And then I was convinced I knew no one who was donor conceived
[08:54] pretty ironic but that was the case and back then and um and then I thought well I think it's a good way to help people because those who want to have children but cannot have a children without help
[09:09] they can be helped if you look at the birth rate also the society uh well, the birthrate is pretty low. So in that sense, it's also for society, I think, a good thing.
[09:24] And donors, they choose themselves whether or not they want to become donors. So it's also free choice. And I don't conceive. I didn't see any problem.
Evert van Vlastuin
[09:33] So that was at school in the 90s, and you didn't see any problem with being a sperm donor?
Menno Hofman
[09:40] No, and I also didn't see any problem if I were donor conceived, then I would also be pretty relaxed about it. That was my idea. And then less than two weeks later, I heard that I was indeed donor conceived, but I never
[09:53] changed my plans. The only thing back then what I did not know was, is it possible? Can you be both donor and donor conceived? So what I thought, I just go to the clinic, I tell them and they can decide if it's safe
[10:11] or not, because I wasn't sure. I knew that Dr. Levy screened the donor for genetic diseases. Although I did not know the person back then, the donor, I knew that he was screened for some health issues.
[10:28] So I knew something about his health even though I didn't know the person yet. And if that's enough or if there were other reasons why it would not be possible, I thought, well, I don't know, but I'll just go and see. But that was not a problem at all. And at that time I was the first at that clinic
[10:47] who knowingly was donor conceived and to become donor.
Evert van Vlastuin
[10:51] Yeah. And you actually did become a donor yourself.
Menno Hofman
[10:56] Yes, yes, yes. Obviously I had to wait because I heard being donor conceived when I was 17, you're not allowed to become a donor at the clinic at least when you're 17. But then when I was 17, you're not allowed to become a donor at the clinic at least when you're 17. But then when I was 18, I became a donor.
Evert van Vlastuin
[11:08] Okay. And do you know how many offspring you have?
Menno Hofman
[11:13] Yeah, roughly 25.
Evert van Vlastuin
[11:14] Roughly 25. Why do you say roughly?
Menno Hofman
[11:18] Because I don't know the exact number, but it was the kind of the limit back then. It was 15 families or 25 children. What first limit was reached.
Evert van Vlastuin
[11:33] Yeah, so that was the maximum.
Menno Hofman
[11:35] That was the maximum, yeah.
Evert van Vlastuin
[11:37] And how old are they now, those children?
Menno Hofman
[11:41] I don't know, but I did some guesswork and I think that some of them will be old enough to be able to contact me because, oh yeah, I forgot to mention, because in the Netherlands, back then we had a system
[11:55] that we could both become an anonymous donor or an ID release donor. And I immediately chose to become ID release. Nowadays, we only have ID release donors.
[12:08] And yeah, it depends on the country. In Europe, some countries still have anonymous donations and some have abolished it too.
Evert van Vlastuin
[12:17] So that means that the children can contact you?
Menno Hofman
[12:21] They can contact me and I assume that some of them are old enough to do so, but so far they haven't done so.
Evert van Vlastuin
[12:28] Right, but when you come home, when you return from here, it is possible that somebody is knocking at the door at home.
Menno Hofman
[12:37] Well, I think they will send something first. Yeah. Because the number, I laugh about it, but in a way it's also a serious thing because some people have the idea that people come knocking on your door. It's a kind of fear which is not realistic because
[12:53] even when my brother unexpectedly thought, oh maybe I'm in the neighborhood and something else was cancelled, he first calls. So if a donor concedes one's contact, you will not
[13:06] just knock on your door. It's not realistic. They will contact first through a clinic or through an agency which you have in the Netherlands and it goes that way.
Evert van Vlastuin
[13:20] Presently you also married and living with your wife and having your own family. How many children do you have? Three. Three. And how does that function together with your direct family and then so to say the larger
[13:38] or the external family?
Menno Hofman
[13:41] Well it's important because I learned that secrecy is not a good thing to do in donor conception. So obviously that also is true for me. So I was open even before our first date.
[13:54] I found my wife through a dating website. And before the first date, I already mentioned that I'm a sperm donor. So that she would know that and can make up their mind if that's a problem or not.
Evert van Vlastuin
[14:08] And how did she experience that?
Menno Hofman
[14:12] Well, at first she was more like, okay. And then when we got more serious, then slowly she had to get used to it more.
Evert van Vlastuin
[14:22] And your children, do they know it?
Menno Hofman
[14:27] Kind of. The oldest two, eight and seven years old, they know a little bit. Sometimes we have some books also about either specific donor conception or just concepts in general.
[14:43] And then I talk about it from time to time because it's also something it's not like you tell it once and then it's clear it doesn't work that way with small children so from time to time you just talk about it and you are a theologian too and you even
Evert van Vlastuin
[15:02] lead church services so that means you are trained in interpreting the bible and the things from Christian worldview. How do you see sperm donation in that perspective?
Menno Hofman
[15:18] Well, for me, it has always been related in my personal choice also, because I'm also Christian myself. So even before I started theology, I already thought about that would be nice to help other people. So and that is also related to many stories in the Bible,
[15:36] which are also about helping other people. Obviously especially when you study theology you go more into depth and deep dive into the specifics.
[15:48] Obviously sperm donation itself will not be found in the Bible. So you can be against it or you can think okay on certain circumstances okay but you will never find 100% support for that view in the Bible.
Evert van Vlastuin
[16:02] Because that technique was not known.
Menno Hofman
[16:05] It did not exist. So you can find some things which are a little bit similar, but it will never be the same.
Evert van Vlastuin
[16:12] But you say, well, the Bible teaches us that we have to be helpful to other people. And it's that perspective that you apply here. Right. Henk, you said, well, you have actually, you are not in favor of this technique. But if you listen to Menno,
[16:38] well, this all sounds reasonable and plausible, doesn't it?
Henk Jochemsen
[16:40] No, it doesn't. It doesn't? No, I don't think so. Okay. It sounds, in a sense it does, of course. In a sense it does, in the sense that helping people as a general principle, doing good and beneficence, is an important general principle. That is true. But ethics is not just about goals, but it's also about means.
Evert van Vlastuin
[17:03] Can you clarify that? Not only goals, but also means?
Henk Jochemsen
[17:07] Ethics nowadays is very much characterized by setting the good ethical goals and then finding ways to reach them. But the ways in which we reach good goals, ethical goals, is a matter of ethics
[17:22] as well. The way we achieve certain things and certain values in life is not value neutral. It's part of ethics. And the way of thinking, helping people, and then that would justify means, I'm not saying all means,
[17:42] but in certain means, that is possible. But even good goals do not justify all the means.
Evert van Vlastuin
[17:49] So you say the intentions can be good, but it doesn't make it all good.
Henk Jochemsen
[17:54] No, no.
Evert van Vlastuin
[17:55] So what's wrong with this?
Henk Jochemsen
[18:02] it all good? No, no. So what's wrong with this? Yes, first of all you have to put it and understand it in a broader context. The very fact that these technologies are called reproductive technologies is telling. Why? People do not reproduce, they procreate. They procreate? Yes,
[18:17] and the fact that in this medical field they have lost, they have dropped the word procreation and it is generally talked about reproduction. If we are six as zero copies.
Evert van Vlastuin
[18:29] Yeah, a copying machine. That's reproducing and…
Henk Jochemsen
[18:32] Reproduction and it's not reproduction.
Evert van Vlastuin
[18:35] In the word procreation there's the word creation there. Exactly. And that's what God is doing.
Henk Jochemsen
[18:41] Yes, completely different. Of course people are involved. But let me put it in another way. Fertilizing an egg is not the same as begetting a child. The point is, how do we understand actions that we are involved in?
[19:01] And philosophy and theology, they try to give meaning, and that's what we all do in all our lives. We try to discover meaning in the way, in the things we do in our lives, in our events.
[19:19] And the way is, how do we discover the meaning of certain things? And if then the context is described with reproduction, I think we should have lots of red lights starting to flash. Because it is not a
[19:37] biblical way of speaking about procreation, getting children and procreating, and here it's called reproduction. So what would be the biblical way to speak about procreation? The biblical way is that God has created
[19:55] man and woman, male and female, in order that they may together get children. And I think that from a biblical view of humanity and of procreation that the personal relationship,
[20:11] the sexual union, the pregnancy, the getting children and the education of children is one coherent unity. Right. We should not split it up in various functions.
[20:27] And here the genetic function is separated from the personal relationship and from the juridical eldership.
[20:40] So I think that this is, in a way, it's a Cartesian way of thinking. Descartes was a famous philosopher in the beginning of the scientific revolution, 17th century, and he said if we split up reality in units and deconstruct
[20:57] it into units and we can reconstruct it in our own way. And postmodernism is even more in that direction. We build our own life. Our life, my life is a project and I make units, I find elements I find relationships I find other people I find techniques and I use them and
[21:19] integrate them into my view of life and then this is what I consider good yeah Menno you listen to
Evert van Vlastuin
[21:26] Hank and Hank says well the biblical model is fatherhood motherhood and children and that belongs together not only at the beginning but for well for for years how does that sound to you well it sounds logical in a way
Menno Hofman
[21:46] but it's not my opinion um as i see it um those things can be split without a big problem in itself although it has some requirements to do it in a in a correct way so i don't think everything's
[22:02] fine but uh under certain conditions I think it can be...
Evert van Vlastuin
[22:06] What would be the correct way?
Menno Hofman
[22:08] I think the correct way would be that you are open from the start and that you realize that children cannot be unborn. So once a procedure is done, a child may be born as a result from it.
[22:24] You cannot go back. You have to realize that, especially as a non-genetic parent, that if you choose this way, there's no way back. That's with all parenthood. If you become a parent, that's it. You can be lucky. your child can be healthy, it can be unhealthy, all kind of things can happen. That's it. You have to deal with it.
Evert van Vlastuin
[22:47] But do you accept that, Henk says, well, the biblical model is much more that fatherhood and motherhood and children are connected?
Menno Hofman
[22:56] Well, that's the most common practice. And that's also, these are more where also exceptions are okay on certain conditions. And in the Bible, you can also find exceptions.
[23:10] For instance, the leaf-right marriage, which I think is closest to the own conception, but it's not the same.
Evert van Vlastuin
[23:15] Can you explain what that is, the leaf?
Menno Hofman
[23:17] Leaf-right marriage, that means that a husband and a wife, they don't get any children. Then the husband dies. And then the woman, she often marries to a brother after her deceased.
Henk Jochemsen
[23:32] If there is.
Menno Hofman
[23:33] It can also be another male relative, a deceased husband. And then the first child born from that new marriage is officially regarded as the child of the deceased husband.
[23:48] So that his name will live on.
Evert van Vlastuin
[23:50] Yeah. Henk, does it sound reasonable?
Henk Jochemsen
[23:53] Yes, I know these arguments, but the point is, and Amando knows this, of course, realizes it very well, that the second marriage is just a marriage. And the child that's born, that would be on the name of the deceased person, but it would be the child in that family.
Evert van Vlastuin
[24:13] But it could be the second wife of that father, so to speak.
Henk Jochemsen
[24:18] Yeah, I'm not sure whether that was implicated in this procedure.
Evert van Vlastuin
[24:29] But sometimes in the Bible you see polygamy.
Henk Jochemsen
[24:32] Exactly. But we see, for example, Abraham and Sarah also had the idea they should help God a little bit. And he married Hagar. In any way, it was a normal marriage. It was one marriage and there was a child there. But it was not necessarily very beneficial. And we see many ways in the Bible
[24:54] in which when we are going other ways from the way indicated by God's word and God's intentions in creation, that God can use it. God is not embarrassed in a sense.
[25:07] So he knows how to deal with it. But that doesn't justify the way that we act. Just as the fact that people are happy. And of course, I realize, I have spoken to parents,
[25:24] couples that couldn't have children in a natural way. IVF procedures, surrogacy, donations. I know this is a very tough issue. I know there's a lot of suffering.
Evert van Vlastuin
[25:38] But do you not accept that all those techniques can be very helpful to those parents?
Henk Jochemsen
[25:43] Yeah, in the sense that desire is fulfilled. But not all desires are necessarily have to be fulfilled. I can have many desires that are against the cause indications for my life, and then I shouldn't pursue them.
[25:58] Now, this desire to have a child is very healthy and natural, and good in itself, a good desire. But again, even good goals do not justify all the means. And I think traditionally in the Christian circles, as I said, I've had the discussions from the beginning.
[26:18] Also, lawyers were very much against it. It was considered as an intrusion in a marriage by a third person.
Evert van Vlastuin
[26:29] Sort of adultery.
Henk Jochemsen
[26:30] Yes, but the word adultery is not honest. It's not correct to say because the woman, the couple doesn't commit adultery. She doesn't want that and therefore she uses artificial inseminated donor.
[26:45] So it's not correct to use the word adultery. But it is an intrusion of a third into a marriage. This is undeniable. There is a very notable way of procedure here.
[26:58] Because first of all, the sperm is very much personal. It has exactly the genes of the donor. It is personal. You can't separate it from the donor. So the donor, but it is depersonalized by not knowing the person. It is becoming a tool, a kind of neutral
[27:19] tool. And then further it is, well, if it is successful, the procedure, a child is born, that child is related to the donor. So in their child, the donor is becoming personal,
[27:34] personally present in a sense. Yeah. Now the secrecy is now over, that is as I said, that is a relative good.
Evert van Vlastuin
[27:42] You mean the anonymity of the donor?
Henk Jochemsen
[27:44] Yeah, the anonymity, the anonymity, yes. So that is okay. But then the child has the possibility of finding out who the person is that gave this anonymous sperm, this genetic material if you like. So it is a strange procedure.
Evert van Vlastuin
[28:07] Yeah, strange procedure.
Henk Jochemsen
[28:09] And it is again, it was considered traditionally by the theologians. I think, I still think this is an important argument. I'm not saying it's a knockout argument right from the beginning, but it is an argument that there is a third person. And sometimes the non-fertile husband has problems in dealing with a child that is not biologically his child.
Evert van Vlastuin
[28:41] And this adopted child, but it is a child of the woman, of his wife. Yeah.
Henk Jochemsen
[28:42] And so there is an anomaly introduced into the family life.
Evert van Vlastuin
[28:47] An anomaly. Neno, you hear about an anomaly and an unpersonal genetic material and so on. How does that come across to you?
Menno Hofman
[28:59] Well in a way a third person is involved and that's all something you have to realize and yeah if you go ahead with it then you have to realize that this person will always be part of your life
[29:12] because it becomes part of the family in a way and if you can't accept it you can also not accept the child because they will also have to they will grow up they will become adults they will resemble some of the characteristics they got from the
[29:26] donor yeah how was it in your situation uh well my father didn't deal with it very well um because i i when i heard it from my mother then i uh after that i called my parents were divorced uh then already for quite some time then i i called him and uh just uh to meet and
[29:46] i want to reassure him that for me nothing changed then i noticed that for him things did change and yeah we tried to to uh to continue having contact but there's one of the reasons i think it did not work
[30:01] out because that he does not process his infertility well right so you think he did not really accept it no and that's also part of the problem is that with the secrecy is if you keep you're not going to process it actively. If you tell your children from the start or maybe even before they're born, when they're
[30:23] still in the belly, you read these kind of stories about sperm and egg and where it comes from and about the donor. If you do that from young age on, you tell it over and over again, it's not just for
[30:38] the child that they will never have a moment, or now they told me me but also for the parents they can get used to it and to process it for myself and sometimes it can still be difficult but that's not the problem I can deal with a
[30:52] father who sometimes have a difficulty even though it's related to my own existence I can accept that but yeah if you clearly haven't processed anything at all and there's also some other kind of things
Evert van Vlastuin
[31:02] which are not related to donor conception then yeah at some point it becomes too much. Yeah, I've read in one of those books that 10% of the donor conceived kids do not know about it.
[31:15] Is that true you think?
Menno Hofman
[31:17] It's hard to tell because we don't know the numbers and also one of the issues is if you want to do research on donor conceived it's very difficult to have a good representation
[31:32] group. Because statistically, yeah, most articles are, you can throw them in the bin because, I mean, there's a huge chance of a bias. Because those who are really interested in it, they will find more other people also don't conceive.
[31:50] They will spend much more energy into it. Those things like, okay, they will probably not do that. So it's very difficult to have good numbers. But I think in the end, when you think about ethics, I think that should not matter.
[32:05] Because even if a small number, for instance, want to know and get contact with a donor, let's say it's 5%, I just make up numbers now. If it would be 5%, it would still be the job from the government to establish the rules that those 5% should have this possibility.
[32:23] So all have to have this possibility and 95% may not use it. And if it would be the other way around, it's still the same. Yeah.
Evert van Vlastuin
[32:37] Another argument used by Henk is that sperm is a very, very personal material. Yeah. Well, blood is that too, actually.
Henk Jochemsen
[32:44] I've been a blood donor for more than... Yeah, but blood is three months away.
Evert van Vlastuin
[32:46] Yeah. Right.
Henk Jochemsen
[32:47] Okay. So the comparison is very relative.
Menno Hofman
[32:50] Right.
Evert van Vlastuin
[32:51] How would you see that comparison, blood and sperm?
Menno Hofman
[32:55] Yeah, I agree with uh i think that it's uh pretty different and even with stem cells you could argue okay stem cells sometimes stem cell therapy means that your blood will be different and contain genes of the donor forever they don't have an impact on your character
Evert van Vlastuin
[33:14] they don't have an impact on your looks or so the impact is much less so if it is that personal, is it good then to handle this so technically?
Menno Hofman
[33:26] I think it's a combination, I think. If you're only focused about techniques, then I think it would be a bad thing. You also have to take into account the personal aspects. And because we know that some, at least a part of the donor conceived,
[33:40] do want, for instance, contact with a donor at some point. So we should establish it. It also means that for those who aspire to become donors, they have to realize, for the rest of my life, it may be that they want to contact me.
[33:54] So if I'm, and I imagined myself that before I did went to the clinic. So I imagined myself living in an elderly place, being 90 years old or so, and someone would knock and say, okay, here's a new donor conceived,
[34:09] wants to meet you. How would that make me feel? And I thought, yeah, I can be open to that. It's a lifelong commitment. You have to take that very serious. As a donor, but also as for the intended parents, if you go through with it,
[34:25] it's a lifelong commitment with every parenthood. Because in a way it is personal. This donor conceived can only receive information about me through this genetic connection. So preferably with me, if I'm gone,
[34:41] my relatives may be able, but it has lifelong implications and people have to realize
Henk Jochemsen
[34:47] that. But here is also an issue. I have so far focused on more principle arguments. Yeah. But there are of course more the teleological or consequentialist arguments. And then I think that if the secrecy is maintained, I don't know, you said 10%.
Evert van Vlastuin
[35:04] 10%.
Henk Jochemsen
[35:05] That's, yes. I wonder whether these are trustworthy, valid data. Okay. I agree with you with the problems with respect to social scientific research in this respect,
[35:19] like several other themes on which I've worked. I know how difficult this is. But it may be higher as well. And if that is the case, then this is a situation that you consciously produce.
Evert van Vlastuin
[35:35] And children for which... You mean this is not something that happens?
Henk Jochemsen
[35:40] No, it's not something that happens, it's beyond your responsibility. It isn't. Because we as a society, donors, physicians, healthcare institutions, we have done this. And if the healthcare is involved in procreation, then healthcare workers, physicians, have a kind of responsibility for the offspring. And that's why they also look
[36:05] at the genes and genetics and for example the disease. And if you use it of course correctly so, definitely. Can you foresee this lifelong commitment that you're describing very well? And also for your own children. They know there are 25 half-sister brothers in our society.
[36:25] How do they know? Will they know? They meet somebody and they fall in love and suddenly it's a half-sister or half-brother.
Menno Hofman
[36:32] Well, it's statistically seen that that's also why the numbers are based on statistics.
Henk Jochemsen
[36:36] I know, I know. But I know also the stories that this happens.
Evert van Vlastuin
[36:39] Yeah, many, yes.
Menno Hofman
[36:40] And also, I inform them from young age on. And so they know also when they're old enough to date, then they also know, they will definitely know more about donor conception than they know today.
[36:56] So they know those donor conceived.
Henk Jochemsen
[36:58] But they don't know who they are. They don't know who they are, no. And I don't know, of course, I'm not trying to say to you, and I don't find this
[37:12] in let's say a very pleasant discussion in the sense that it may seem as an attack to you, which it's not, I hope you understand, not to you personally, not at all. But how are you dealing as a person with the fact that there are 25 children in this society,
[37:27] your children, for which you have no responsibility whatsoever, but it's your children, biologically, genetically.
Evert van Vlastuin
[37:35] Do you feel responsible for them?
Henk Jochemsen
[37:37] Isn't that a strange situation? Are we not creating situations that we cannot oversee and we cannot be responsible for?
Evert van Vlastuin
[37:46] Menno, do you feel any responsibility for them?
Menno Hofman
[37:49] I feel some responsibility, but I think it's also important that the whole concept of donor conception is that the intended parents are the ones who are responsible for the daily support. So they are responsible
[38:01] to have the financial, practical, all kind of support that they can raise the children. So that's their responsibility. They have full parental. I don't feel responsible for that part. I do feel responsible
[38:17] if they want to have contact uh one day that i'll be open to that and how that will go you never know but you also know that with your own children how things will go this part of life is that you accept that you don't know exactly how it will go but i trust that
Evert van Vlastuin
[38:33] i'll find a way and but in normal situations the number of kids are um lower i mean it families with more than 10 children are rare and more than 15 is very
[38:47] exceptional but you have 25 if they all come and asking you for whatever is it really possible to handle that
Menno Hofman
[38:58] yeah I think so I think it's very unlikely that they will but I did you make some savings no but because they don't have any financial, they get nothing.
[39:10] Financially, they get nothing. Because I also want to make that clear. And sometimes I hear from certain donors, they even adopt or become also legal parents many years later.
[39:26] But I don't think that's a good idea, because I think it's good to keep those things clear. Because then it's also clear that my children who live with me at home, they won't suffer from it financially. So it's more about relation and support and contact.
[39:41] Those kind of things I can do.
Evert van Vlastuin
[39:42] Yeah. Henk, you touched already to the risk of sort of inbreeding. Many people have doubts because of this risk. How real is that risk actually?
Henk Jochemsen
[39:55] Oh, you should have statistical calculations. I mean, in this way, the ages are more or less overlapping. So, in that sense, it could be a possibility. The chances are not very high, but it's not impossible as well.
[40:13] I mean, I have read stories about this. And furthermore, we have also recently had these scandals of physicians who have used their own sperm hundreds of times. Now, you can say this has nothing to do with the correct use. I know abuse does not dismiss good use. At the same time, if a certain technique is so open
[40:36] for abuse and now they will say of course, oh but this belongs, that's earlier, that will not happen again. I know these control, there have been in all kinds
[40:57] of technology and technological developments and time and again you find again that things have gone wrong. Because we do not control as we think we can. And I think there are certain ways even if we follow the rules. And it has become, especially
[41:24] in reprogenetics as they call now, reprogenetics, there had been a tremendous opportunity and the techniques nowadays are almost, you know, endless and what you can do. And I think it has gone far Trying to control the procreation and the quality of procreation,
[41:46] because there's more and more quality control as well. I think it's not good. It's not the intention of the creator. We should not deal in this way with people, with human life. And of course, artificial insemination donor is the least technological.
[42:04] So it's not as far as many of the other things. And I don't put it all on the same level. But still, it is a beginning. It is a beginning. It's the first step of a whole array of technological interventions
[42:20] in the procreation, which I think is... And again, I understand that people who have been helped to have a child after IVF... I mean, I know people who have children by the use of IVF, and they are very happy with the children. And of course,
[42:38] you are very glad with them, with their happiness with the family. It's very kind of mixed, you know. And that again, that does not justify after all the way it has been done.
[42:50] No. Let me take an extreme example. And the point of comparison is not the way. But even if somebody, if a woman becomes pregnant by rape, that doesn't say
[43:06] anything about the value of the child. There's a child created in the image of God, same dignity. And maybe the mother is happy afterwards with the child, sometimes that happens, but that doesn't justify at all the origin of the child.
Evert van Vlastuin
[43:22] Meno, a donor conceived person has no insight in the hereditary diseases of his family. And that's one of the problems the donor-conceived children sometimes mention
[43:36] in the books that I have read. How impractical is that?
Menno Hofman
[43:41] Yeah, I think it's... Yeah, although some screening has been done, you can never know everything. So it's important to share such information and also the register. And also the GP can also contact this register and if they have some questions related
[44:00] to possible genetic diseases and then information can be that sense be shared even if and I think it's yeah I think ideally it would not require information from a donor himself or herself
[44:16] because you can also just let that go that part go through doctors and personal contact in another way. However, it's probably best to be able also to have contact with a donor. Therefore, it's good also that this anonymous donation has been abolished
Evert van Vlastuin
[44:35] here. So you say actually it's unpractical, but problems can be prevented? Problems can be
Menno Hofman
[44:42] prevented and I think it's good to have the option to have contact with a donor if you have questions although i think it would be more as i would say more neat if it also have a medical way of medical route without any personal data because you may not be
[44:59] interested in knowing your donor but you may have some interest in finding out about some genetic issues it should be constructed in such a way that you can find out this information also without the
[45:15] donor but this is something which is beyond my control. So therefore then I think it's easier to, yeah, because here we have the ID release age of 16 years old, which is also under debate now because many believe that this should be abolished. Including also a
[45:31] number of other donors also agree with me that this should be abolished because it doesn't make any sense.
Evert van Vlastuin
[45:38] But as a donor you can also lie about the genetic disorders in your family.
Menno Hofman
[45:44] Yeah, that's possible. But the good thing here at least is that you don't get money for sperm donation. So in that sense...
Evert van Vlastuin
[45:54] You don't get rich from it.
Menno Hofman
[45:57] You don't get rich from it. Because sometimes in countries like in America, people can make a lot of money from it. So then you have more incentive to lie about it because it can give a serious reward for it in return.
[46:13] And at least that's not the case. It doesn't rule out everything. But that's, yeah, to a certain extent, that's unavoidable. Yeah. People can also lie about motivation. People can lie about everything. But the same is true in relationships.
[46:29] Because if I look at the marriage of my parents, then my father also wasn't always that honest about certain things. And he also mentioned that he already processes infertility and to the doctor and then it turns out not to be the case.
Evert van Vlastuin
[46:46] Yeah. Henk, what will be the future of this technique?
Henk Jochemsen
[46:52] It will just continue. I think it has been with us over 50 years, I guess.
Evert van Vlastuin
[46:58] So it will not stop?
Henk Jochemsen
[47:00] No, I don't think so. No. Well, maybe new techniques may overcome infertility with the aid of stem cells and with the production of gametes in vitro.
[47:13] In vitro gametogenesis, that is being done right now. So that via the kind of cultivation of cells in a laboratory, that of all people you could get sperm cells or egg cells. Whether they are then necessarily
[47:35] fertile I don't know. I don't know whether we can tell this beforehand. I'm not sure.
Evert van Vlastuin
[47:42] You have mentioned several objections. What is your main concern with this?
Henk Jochemsen
[47:51] Well, my main principle apart from the kind of consequential problems that are still with us, My main point is that, well, what I say, the unity of procreation and marriage and sexuality. And the point is, we live in
[48:11] an age of technicism. And technicism means that techniques are considered as a means to fulfill our goals. And that suggests that a technological intervention with the same goal as a natural goal is just a value-neutral
[48:28] variant and variation of the natural way of doing. And I think that's wrong. Because the natural way, now the nature is fallen creation, but in natural ways of that things may go,
[48:42] we can still distinguish the intention of male and female, a couple for
[48:54] marriage or sexual relationships and procreation. And I think that kind of interference in that is disturbing this ideal.
[49:10] We live by images, we interpret by images and we have carved images and we have given images. And in the 10th commandment, God forbids us to make carved images. Now it's in first of all, it's a carved image of himself.
[49:25] And that's impossible, of course, to make any image of God. But we can also make carved images as technological substitutes of indications of the way things
[49:39] are meant to be. And I think that we with our modern technologies are especially in the field of reprogenetics, not only there, but especially in that field. We are replacing given images of procreation in the way God
[49:54] intended in creation and replacing them with technological interventions. And I think this is problematic, this is undermining families and this is, yeah, in the way God intended it to be.
Evert van Vlastuin
[50:07] Menno, how do you see the future of this donor conception? Yeah, I think just like Henkel already mentioned
Menno Hofman
[50:16] that techniques may be developed to have to derive egg or sperm from cultured cells. So that would enable for instance to women to have a child with both genetically related to them.
[50:32] So therefore I think the need for sperm donors will decrease in that sense for couples however in single women they would still need another partner in that sense genetic partner for having a child unless they're cloning and I
Henk Jochemsen
[50:50] think that's not very likely. No they may be able to make sperm cells with x chromosome. Yes but I
Menno Hofman
[50:55] mean but you can't you cannot not have children with yourself because that would be a super in breeding so that that won't work so if you So if you're a single woman and you want to have a child, you need someone else,
[51:07] another person to provide also gamete. So you need...
Henk Jochemsen
[51:12] It's healthier, but technically it's imaginable.
Menno Hofman
[51:16] Yeah, but I think that when we're inbreeding, I think that will not be viable. So as I see it, that will not be possible unless you're cloning. So I don't think that will take off a lot.
Evert van Vlastuin
[51:31] But you think this technique will have a future?
Menno Hofman
[51:34] But I think the culturing gametes will decrease the number of sperm donors required for couples at least.
Evert van Vlastuin
[51:45] What will be the main challenge for you regarding this technique?
Menno Hofman
[51:50] I think the main challenge is to find out if it's really safe. And then it would help people in a way different if you're not depending on a donor certain of the challenges you may have with a donor conception they will not be there because
[52:08] you don't have this third person involved which has its challenges and which you have to consider if you're open to that or not and that will not be the case. You will have technological procedures but they will especially if it's from culture itself, they will not be very invasive.
[52:29] And so therefore I expect actually that it may make lives a lot easier for many people.
Evert van Vlastuin
[52:36] A lot easier. Yeah. Thank you very much for being here and for this respectful discussion, as I could say it. Thank you for listening to this podcast from Christian Network Europe. And please come to cne.news for more of this in articles and newsletters
[52:56] or download our app. And don't forget to sign up for this podcast to hear us again next week. Thank you very much.