John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Acting Deputy President Moore, for occupying the chair at a time when I am supposed to be there. This afternoon, I want to speak for the time allocated on an issue that is very important to me and very close to me. In the year 2004, I undertook a study tour to look into the problems that were being confronted by donor inseminated conceived adults—adults who were finding out late in their life in most instances that they were brought into this world through donor insemination conception. The issue that prompted that study tour in the first instance was an inquiry of this Senate into IVF and related matters some time before.

Donor inseminated conceived adults are an emerging group of disadvantaged people, not only in Australia but world wide. The problems that they face, simply put, include the fact that: these people do not know that they are donor inseminated conceived in the vast majority of cases—almost overwhelmingly; they do not know who their parent is or parents are in many instances; they have psychological and emotional problems when eventually they find out that they are DI conceived; they have no support mechanisms provided by the state that sanctioned their conception; they have in some cases numerous full or half siblings in the broader community; and there is no compulsory register of donors to enable these people to establish their identities.

Recently, the Donor Conception Support Group contacted me once again in the wake of my previous study tour and my statements in this area. I will quote briefly from the letter that they sent to me, which highlights the frustration that they are experiencing. I am pleased to see Senator Murray here, because I know that Senator Murray is a very good supporter of this group. I quote from their letter to me dated 25 September:

As you know our group has been trying to convince all state governments to follow the lead of Victoria and enact legislation that would give future donor offspring the right to know who they are related to and would give those donor offspring already in existence a chance of finding our information about their donors and half siblings. What is really needed is for the Federal Government to step in and create a national register. We have asked the Federal Government on a number of occasions to consider doing this but each time we are told that they cannot do legislation for a register because ‘health’ is a state matter.

The frustration that this organisation is confronted with is that they are told it is a state matter yet they see things being done federally. As you will find, in many instances donor insemination comes about as a result of funding that is provided through Medicare for assisted reproductive technology.

The pamphlet that they included highlights their case better than I can outline it. It says:

Victoria is the only state to have put in place legislation that gives donor conceived people the right to their medical and genetic identities.

That is almost true; it is a voluntary register, not a compulsory register. They go on to say:

Why should other donor conceived Australians be discriminated against by being denied information about their medical histories, biological parents, brothers and sisters? It’s wonderful that we now have a National Register for organ transplantation this will surely save many lives. However, when will Australia follow the UK in legislation and establishment of a National Register so that all donor conceived people in this country can have access to their full medical and genetic histories?

They go on to say:

Millions of tax payers dollars are spent via Medicare on ART every year

Donor semen, eggs and embryos are coming into this country from Denmark, Sweden, USA, UK and Greece

Donor semen crosses state borders: from Qld into NSW, WA into Victoria, NSW into Qld. One member of our group has discovered that he has 29 half siblings, 20 in South Australia and 9 in NSW.

The cost to the mental health of Australian families because of secrecy in donor conception.

Who will be accountable when any of these people inadvertently form a relationship with their full donor embryo siblings or half siblings?

As I said, their document says it in its own right. So this is not a debate about the right of an adult or adults to have a child. No-one, in my view, has the right to have a child. A child is not a possession, an object of ownership. A child is an individual in their own context and it is the child that has the pre-eminent rights. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child says at article 8:

1. States Parties undertake to respect the right of the child to preserve his or her identity, including nationality, name and family relations as recognized by law without unlawful interference.

2. Where a child is illegally deprived of some or all of the elements of his or her identity, States Parties shall provide appropriate assistance and protection, with a view to re-establishing speedily his or her identity.

This led me down the path to do my study tour and my report. In my report I made a number of recommendations, which obviously are not binding on anyone other than me. In my report, which I submitted to the then Special Minister of State in 2004, I made these points:

5. DIs must be told of the way they were conceived by their parents no later than the age of majority.

That seems reasonable to me. I then said:

6. DIs must have this fact indicated on their birth certificate for any certificate issued within 12 months of achieving their age of majority.

Otherwise the birth certificate is a fraud. Then I said:

7. A register of donors must be kept centrally to allow the identity of the donor to be gained.

I went on:

10. Counselling must be made available independently of the clinic providing the procedure to the donor of the sperm/egg to the parents, and to any DI child/adult upon discovering they were donor conceived.

11. Counselling must be audited to see that it is delivering the desired goals.

12. There seems to be an almost complete lack of research on the impact of donating sperm/eggs on donors on a longitudinal basis and no research on those who discover later in life that they are DI as to what their needs (including support) might be.

This is an area that has just flourished. It is now clearly funded through the federal taxpayers’ purse. Last year, assisted reproductive technology was funded to the order of $65 million. Over the last five years, it has been $205 million. Yet these people have no support whatsoever—absolutely nil. They are out there on their own. It is quite wrong that we have a class of people who are not only denied their identity and their right to family but denied the support of the state which sanctioned their conception in the first place. There needs to be, in my view, a federal parliamentary inquiry, given that the occurrence of DIs is most likely to have taken place with federal funding. Someone has to accept that responsibility. The buck-passing between the states and the federal government has to stop. DIs as a class of citizens should not be discriminated against. A joint federal-state solution must be found in equity and good conscience for this group of people who have been denied their fundamental rights by a selfish and non-caring society. Is there no compassion left in our society for this group of people?

Not everyone knows that they are DI conceived, but it is upon discovery that they are DI conceived that people have the psychological and mental traumas that none of us who know who are natural parents are are faced with. DI-conceived adults can be left no longer as social lepers. They have an entitlement to their dignity. I would urge the federal and the state governments, through the appropriate ministries, to get together, address this issue and help this group of people who are seeking help to come to grips with the position that they find themselves in because of the state sanction. (Time expired)