is nothing sacred I mean...seriously??

is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

subtlebutterfly -> is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? (4/9/2009 4:46:02 AM)
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20227032.400-sperm-bank-sued-under-product-liability-law.html ...do people really need to sue every single thing? this's sooooooo wrong.... I mean even though it may be a product in this case...it's just asking for problems if the court is going to hold the bank liable...if it does consider the bank liable I can't see that lawsuits will only be limited to sperm banks... all people with genetic diseases should then be able to sue their parents..or grandparents..or I don't know how far back you need to go to find the source of the genetic disease, otherwise test-tube..people (or whatever the word is..) are in better position than people that were conceived...uh..produced... normally[&:] I mean I doubt you can discriminate people on the grounds of what sperm they're made of[&:] gah this is such a BS..........

colouredin -> RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? (4/9/2009 4:56:54 AM)
Umm dont sperm banks have to check for stuff like that before they start impregnating people?

subtlebutterfly -> RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? (4/9/2009 5:02:21 AM)
true but can you always guarantee and prevent all diseases? I mean it's like those things..when two black people give birth to a white offspring..or two whites get black offspring just 'cause somewhere far back there was one black/white ancestor, sometimes the hidden "gene" pops up out of nowhere. Maybe the blood showed it was clean, but the father was still carrying the disease but it simply was "hidden"...get my point?

colouredin -> RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? (4/9/2009 5:12:47 AM)
I do get your point but I also remember not that long ago here a blood bank didnt test the blood properly and gave some people hepititus and HIV sometimes its sloppyness and im thinking that hospitals and such do need to be pulled up on it

kittinSol -> RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? (4/9/2009 5:54:12 AM)
Can I just ask you why you believe it's wrong that the sperm bank should be held accountable for selling a defective product? Typo edit...

subtlebutterfly -> RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? (4/9/2009 6:07:36 AM)
because like I said..if you can do that, then I believe people could just as well sue their parents for whatever genetic disease they get. Or..if people can only sue sperm banks but not the parents..then that leads to people being in much better situation just finding a sperm through the sperm bank and use it to get impregnated..I mean if something goes wrong you can always just sue the bank because..after all, you got a broken product. I can't understand why sperm banks don't offer a refund already..or do they? What's the point in fucking and then have to take the risk of all the disesases and imperfections.... not to mention that you have to take the consequences, when you instead can just jump to the next sperm bank n voila you get the perfect product..or if not, you just sue them!

kittinSol -> RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? (4/9/2009 6:28:21 AM)
These are all valid concerns - but do you see that the plaintive in this case has a point? Had the sperm bank done its job properly in screening the genetic material, she would not have the huge medical expenses she has to face today. Someone's responsible for them, and we live in a world where litigation rules over regulation... It is probably the only way her parents can recoup some of the cost of having to care for her. Fragile X syndrome is no picnic... medicine evolves faster than ethics. It's one of the great difficulties of modern medical techniques.

colouredin -> RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? (4/9/2009 6:29:02 AM)
I think thats a bit far fetched, a sperm bank is a business parents arent. If you sell a product you have a responsibility to make sure that its a good product. You go to a sperm bank for many reasons, hell maybe its that the biological parents had genetic diseases and so didnt want to risk it, to then for you to find out it was a mistake then it is the banks fault

subtlebutterfly -> RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? (4/9/2009 6:41:41 AM)
Of course I see the point..however there always is a risk. Far fetched true..........................but people these days[8\|] personally I (at the time) would've found it far fetched that there would actually be need to be put in instructions that animals can't be put into the dryer...or the microwave peoples thoughts tend to be very............far fetched

kittinSol -> RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? (4/9/2009 6:52:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: colouredin I think thats a bit far fetched, a sperm bank is a business parents arent. If you sell a product you have a responsibility to make sure that its a good product. You go to a sperm bank for many reasons, hell maybe its that the biological parents had genetic diseases and so didnt want to risk it, to then for you to find out it was a mistake then it is the banks fault Precisely. This is the capitalistic Mecca: since everything is marketable, every enterprise that sells something is liable for selling a defective product - even a spunk bank. It's crazy, but it's logical.

YoursMistress -> RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? (4/9/2009 6:53:33 AM)
But isn't she actually "the product?' I mean, without the sperm, she doesn't even exist. This is like the "victim" of a failed attempt at IV suing for not being born at all. A sperm that failed to produce life seems far more defective than one the produces a living breathing, thinking, suing human being, Is Stephen Hawking really defective, or is he perfect? Was Helen Keller defective? Everyone has what we might refer to as imperfections, some with more far-reaching consequences and costs than others. I suppose that someone who was born without a single genetic flaw might just as easily sue for being given such ridiculously high expectations for success too. Yes, that is a little bit of a stretch. So sue me, lol. [:D] yours

scarlethiney -> RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? (4/9/2009 7:03:20 AM)
While I agree we are a litigious society, often unnecessarily so I do not agree that the sperm bank holds no responsibility in this situation. If you were given blood that was tainted , that wasn't tested before being supplied to you and you ended up with Aids are you saying you wouldn't feel the company that provided the blood was responsible for your contracting Aids? If you provide a service, especially if you provide a service that impacts a persons life or involves anything genetic then you should be responsible for providing all necessary testing, evaluation and also anticipating every possibility of the genetic makeup of that donor. We are not talking about something trivial here. This severely impacted this young girls life forever.

colouredin -> RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? (4/9/2009 7:04:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subtlebutterfly Of course I see the point..however there always is a risk. Far fetched true..........................but people these days[8\|] personally I (at the time) would've found it far fetched that there would actually be need to be put in instructions that animals can't be put into the dryer...or the microwave peoples thoughts tend to be very............far fetched Aint that the truth, I remember first time I heard about a child 'divorcing' their parents. Tis a sad world. Ks Yup its the unfortunate nature of capitalism, we always need to have someone to blame, just so long as it isnt ourselves, god forbid.

kittinSol -> RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? (4/9/2009 7:04:36 AM)
It's a crazy fucked-up world.

YoursMistress -> RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? (4/9/2009 7:20:05 AM)
I wonder what the bank's stated limits of liability are. If someone asked me to sell them genetic material, (and I would gladly provide the installation free of charge) I wouldn't know what to tell them regarding Fragile X, having never heard of it before. It still seems unfair to me to expect that because the sperm is provided by a bank, the offspring produced by it ought to be "better" than those produced by conventional means. yours ("conventional means" being fucking)

MissEnchanted -> RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? (4/9/2009 7:22:54 AM)
Subtlebutter, I wonder how much it would cost the sperm banks to screen for every single defect? Maybe they could bump the price up for people who are getting that sperm and keep the price lower when people are willing to take the risk?

kittinSol -> RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? (4/9/2009 7:23:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: YoursMistress ("conventional means" being fucking) Shocking [8D]!

colouredin -> RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? (4/9/2009 7:25:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: YoursMistress It still seems unfair to me to expect that because the sperm is provided by a bank, the offspring produced by it ought to be "better" than those produced by conventional means. yours ("conventional means" being fucking) Well when you have a conventional relationship you are able to have tests for many genetic illnesses, plus knowledge of your family tree. With a sperm bank its a stranger, you assume that the background work has been done, you cant go to the guy who gave the sperm and ask him can you?

igor2003 -> RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? (4/9/2009 7:45:06 AM)
fast reply I believe the article said the girl was 13 wasn't she? Meaning she would have been conceived about 14 years ago or about 1995. Did the technology even exist at that time to test for genetic defects of that nature? If not, then I really don't see how the sperm bank could be held responsable for not detecting a defect for which there was no test available.

UncleNasty -> RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? (4/9/2009 8:42:33 AM)
To quote the Python, "Every sperm is sacred..." Uncle Nasty

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625