Bio
I write Stirrup Queens when I'm not reading other people's blogs, cooking, or chasing after my twins. I'm the author of two books: Life from Scratch,...
 
 
 
 

What’s Hot on BlogHer.com

Recent Comments

Why Egg Donors Should Be Compensated

  • Share This Post
  • submit
  • 11
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

Back in college, the popular way to make beer money was to sell your plasma. It was so popular that the student handbook listed the plasma center along with a few local dry cleaner recommendations and coupons to a sandwich shop. I'm not sure what the going rate was back in 1992, but a quick search online yielded that the going rate for plasma is about $70/week (two donations a week at $35 each).

What made me think of this today? Because I read an argument against compensating egg donors stating that no other donated body part or product receives financial compensation. And that's just not true, there's plasma. In fact, it is legal in America to be financially compensated for cells, though you cannot be compensated for organs.

FoxNews reported back in November that plasma donations were up as first time donors stepped up to earn gas and grocery money by selling their blood product, which brings us to Salon's article this week on Broadsheet discussing the increase in egg donors and the ethics of paid donations. Quoting a recent Boston Herald article and the constant discussions around the Internet on this topic from the Wall Street Journal to the Washington Post, the post begins: "In these stark economic times, what's a gal to do when the creditors have the phone ringing off the hook or when her boss shovels her onto the fast-growing pile of the nation's unemployed? For an increasing number of women, it means considering selling their eggs for anywhere from $5,000 to $10,000."

Donations are, by their very definition, gifts without compensation. I fully agree with anyone who argues that donors who receive compensation are not donors by definition; though I also argue that donor is an antiquated word that no longer holds meaning in our society. Political donors give money with gain both tangible and intangible in mind from access to positions within an administration to simply having your desired party in place when policy is being decided. Philanthropic donors gets a building named after them after they cough up a ten million dollar check. It's not that there aren't people out there doing something for nothing, but most people want recognition of their gift, if not financial compensation.

If it helps, we can rename egg donors "egg suppliers" instead.

Tracy Clark-Flory did a fantastic job on the Salon piece pointing out that donors who are solely financially-driven usually do not make it through the rigorous screening process required of all potential donors (though returns with an alarmist final thought on financial desperation). Those who donate solely to make money with no regard to the enormity of the task on hand--emotionally or physically (for themselves, their recipient, and any children born of their gametes)--are generally left disappointed with a rejection slip. Over 90% of wannabe donors do not make it to that first lupron needle.

But what about the yuckiness of feeling like life is being bought or sold? Frankly, there is plenty of yuckiness in the world that we'll need to discuss in addition to this topic such as the fact that our medical system is a for-profit system, benefiting off the health woes of society. That our pharmaceutical companies do not make drugs out of the goodness of their hearts, but to turn a profit. Our medical system in and off itself is not noble. It's goal is not to keep society well, but to keep society well while turning a profit.

Every child has a price tag regardless of how that child comes into your family. It may be as low as a handful of co-payments or it may stretch into the tens of thousands depending on how much assistance you needed with family building. But in all circumstances, what you are paying for is a service, not a child, and those who state otherwise to make their argument do so to be inflammatory and insulting.

But what about the fear that women are being exploited? I think it demeans the intelligence of women and our ability to make choices. If I need money, there are a multitude of ways I can make money beyond going through rigorous testing, daily injections, and painful surgical procedures (aaah, who am I kidding? No one would pay for my eggs). It is certainly not a quick buck. If a woman chooses to be

  • 11
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

Comments

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest
onwardandsideways 5 pts

Personally speaking... I think this is an issue of morality. Why? Because you're talking about human life, not BMWs. Can you put a price on human life? No you cannot. If you were to try, you could easily rationlize that the donors should be paid far more than the $5, 6, 7, 10, 20K (and more) that they receive.

To submit the creation of life to the laws of the Free Market is crossing a line that I don't think should be crossed. It devalues life and it's demeaning to the donor herself. How do you value the worth of one donor over another? Her looks? Her degrees? Her accomplishments? Her previous donations? What about her heart and her soul? What about the fact that the woman who chose her knows in her heart that this donor is 'The One', regardless of what she looks like on paper? How can you possibily put a price tag on something like that?

The donors go through a lot. They miss work, vacations, holidays, events, and take risks with their own bodies. How could you not expect them to want something to thank them for their time and trouble? How could you not want to give them something?

I think there's a lot of smoke and mirrors in the infertility industry and this idea that some donors are 'better' than others is grotesque. I've seen the $20, $40K donors profiles... and let me tell you, they are not all that. Not a single one of them I've seen could be classified as beautyqueen material, future Nobel Peace prize winners, entrepreneurs or concert hall A-listers, and several of them came from very average universities. When I saw those profiles (and out of curiosity, I looked at quite a few), that's when I realized that these $$$$$$$ donor price tags are primarily being created by that other nebulous factor in the world of Donor Egg Conception: donor agencies. That's a whole other topic for discussion though.

There are many donors that won't accept a fee, or won't accept past a certain amount. While I can't imagine asking someone to go through all that and not give them something (unless maybe it was a known donor who wanted it that way), I can't imagine telling an IF couple -- many of whom have already suffered enormous financial and emotional losses -- that they would have to fork over yet more serious cash to have a half-decent chance at success using my eggs.

This is where I think higher fees for 'proven' donors is really outrageous. We're already being raped by the health care system and the IF clinics... allowing the agencies to jack up the donor's fees is what really adds insult to injury.

So yes, paid... but I think capping it at a 'reasonable' amount, say $6-7K per cycle, regardless of stats and previous outcomes, ought to be law. It's the only way to keep greed out of the picture, and the real motiviation, i.e., creating life in its proper perspective.

onwardandsideways 5 pts

Hey Melissa... um, being a soon-to-be DE recipient who has reviewed HUNDREDS of donor profiles... just had to correct you there a bit. Perhaps those who use a clinic's agency don't get to review many profiles, but if you go with your own agency, you look at as many profiles as you'd like. And you better believe I did... LOL

onwardandsideways 5 pts

You assume that anyone reviewing your profile, had you had one, would have found you to not be a 'homely' or 'uneducated' girl. You should have seen the so-called 'Ivy Leaguers' profiles that were emailed to me. Not a single one was 'gorgeous' or highly educated. The qualities you purport to have are SUBJECTIVE qualities and it would have been up to the IP to decide whether you actually have them or not.

And the only way you could have known if your eggs were in the $10K+ category would have been to have gone through at least 1-2 successful cycles, where a pregnancy or live birth occurred. Seeing as you never did that, your point is kind of moot. And even if you now have children, there is no way you could ever know how you would have done as a donor.

What is the point is that high-paid donors are paid primarily because of their past success rate, not their looks, education or talents. You should educate yourself a little more before you post on this topic.

SunniDee 5 pts

A girl from California posted a story on a UK infertility site talking about her donation process and about the compensation she received/needed.  I think a donor should get paid, they go through a lot to help out others.  

http://www.fertilityzone.co.uk/thread.php?threadid...

Melissa Ford 5 pts

To be fair, unlike sperm donation, recipients of egg donation generally don't have a lot of choice.  They do take the next healthy donor.  They can give a few guidelines and can pay more for a donor with known success, but they don't get to peruse numerous profiles.

You make valid points about letting the charges be controlled by the market, but of course the prostitution analogy doesn't work.  Egg donors are providing a solution to a medical condition.  Prostitutes are providing sex.  And because we are speaking about a medical condition--one similar to blindness or deafness which are both lifestyle threatening rather than life threatening--I think the analogy could be a bit more respectful.

Venting about infertility since 2006
www.stirrup-queens.blogspot.com ( http://www.stirrup-queens.blogspot.com )
and we're not talkin' cowgirls...

Sandradginzburg 5 pts

I completely agree that egg donors ought to be compensated.  For that matter, so should organ donors. But why impose a price cap?  I'm an Ivy League grad, reasonably cute and I had my first baby easily at 24.  I bet my eggs would have commanded a pretty penny while I was in my 20s.  Why shouldn't I have gotten paid more for my eggs than a homely uneducated girl? Of course, if we allowed a true market to develop in human eggs, it would expose the craven priorities of the buyers.  (Not that their priorities are any more craven than the fertile population, but the fact is that craven fertiles are stuck with their own craven genes and don't have the option of shopping around.) There's the rub. I would support egg donation if buyers were obligated to take any healthy donor provided.  Creating a supermarket of donor gametes in which buyers can shop around is a form of objectification of women, no matter how you spin it.  Imposing price caps adds insult to injury.  At least prostitutes can charge whatever the market will bear.

nellewrites 6 pts

a year or so ago, and must admit I'd never given it much thought, nor do I really have a stance on this issue.

There are good points on both sides, though I would probably tilt towards payment. 

nelle ( http://refractivethoughts.org/ )

/

llhaesa ( http://llhaesa.org/ )

Melissa Ford 5 pts

Cheekysweetie brings up a really interesting point about body and mind.  I don't have a good answer.  I like being paid for my ideas and frankly, if I wasn't paid for my ideas--either with money or self-esteem or some other intangible payment--I probably wouldn't be as inclined to give them away.  The recognition of the hard work is an incentive.

While we may be disgusted over the idea of selling cells, the fact remains that the system that is currently in place doesn't work.  The need for cells, organs, and blood far outweigh the willingness of the masses to step forward and provide--even when it is of little trouble or a small risk.  So what is the solution that will bring more people to donate blood, cells, and organs--especially those who are not personally affected or risk a loss if they don't step forward to help?

How many readers who can regularly donate blood do regularly donate blood?  If so, what motivates you.  If not, what incentive would you need?

Venting about infertility since 2006
www.stirrup-queens.blogspot.com ( http://www.stirrup-queens.blogspot.com )
and we're not talkin' cowgirls...

CheekySweetie 5 pts

I am curious how giving of one's body is held in such a different light than giving of one's mind, or soul.  To me, my body is simply the physical manifestation of the person I am, as my mind is the intellectual manifestation, and my soul is the spiritual manifestation.  I don't see a big divide between giving someone cells from my body and giving them ideas from my mind, or advice from my soul.  Granted egg donation is an "issue" of a different magnitude because reproductive issues are such hot buttons.  But for me, personally, my cells are no more valuable than the other parts of me that make up the person I am, and I share those all day, every day...and I wouldn't have it any other way.

Cheeky Sweetie-just the mom-next-door ( http://www.cheekysweetie.com )

Michellesamom 5 pts

But then again, I think it's a disgusting practice to pay someone for blood/plasma as well. We don't do that here, it's illegal. I don't think any part of any person (or any person) should be bought, ever.

Michelle writes at Michelle's Blog ( http://michellesamom.blogspot.com )

Zandria 5 pts

There's a lot more involved with being an egg donor than there is with giving plasma. You have to have regular doctor's appointments, you have to abstain from sex for a few months while your body is developing the eggs, I'm pretty sure you can't drink alcohol...etc. So it's not just some random, easy thing to do.

Personal blog: Zandria.us ( http://www.zandria.us )
BlogHer blog: Singles/Fitness ( http://blogher.com/blog/zandria )