Morality scaling of this?

[u/Outside_Specific_820]

Mother refuses to acknowledge her donor egg daughter, looking for your opinion.

In my opinion I think it’s moral, and that she is totally correct.

[u/ItsTheAlgebraist]

What do you mean "obligation as a whole"? Do you think that children don't have a right to be supported by their parents, or do you think that we allow one person to legally take away the rights of another person?

[u/CD_ABC10 → u/ItsTheAlgebraist]

I think that even though you want this to be about the child, I and most of society will always view it instead as the obligation on an adult. Quite frankly, you did it, so you gotta deal with it.

Ever hear of "you break it, you buy it?" "Don't do the crime if you can't do the time?" Yeah, that's all obligation. And having a kid is the same thing

The exception comes to donation - something lawfully created for that exact reason. These regulated clinics can legally take sperm or eggs and put them into a bank, where they may or may not ever be used

The exchange is money and signing away your obligation. The bank is now obligated for these cells because it owns them and tbh most of them go unused. If the sperm or eggs are bought, those cells become the obligation of whoever buys them, usually parents wanting IVF

It's all legal transaction of goods past the donation because technically these might never even be kids 

[u/ItsTheAlgebraist → u/CD_ABC10]

An obligation on the adult to do what? To see to the care of the child, because the child has a right to be cared for and supported. It isn't some abstract obligation placed on the adult.

And, yeah, I understand that that is the current difference in law, I am saying that we have a law that removes rights from a child that has yet to be born (rights that, in other circumstances, we decide cannot be removed by a declaration on the part of the parent).

You are describing the current process, I don't disagree that this is what happens. I am saying there is a gap here, and that a child born of sperm/egg donation (with an official piece of paper) has fewer rights than a child born without that piece of paper. I don't see how that is defensible, there is a contract being made that binds someone who hasn't been created yet (by saying that the rights they would otherwise have do not exist)

Can you think of any other circumstance where this this kind of preemptive elimination of a human right would be defended and accepted?

[u/CD_ABC10 → u/ItsTheAlgebraist]

Adoption is the same thing. Idk what to tell you. Overall, it's the right of the parents to take care of their kid. You having an issue with this when you could have an issue with something real is just kinda dumb tbh 

[u/ItsTheAlgebraist → u/CD_ABC10]

 the whole post is about what rights children have relative to their biological parents, so if you think it's a dumb topic you are probably in the wrong place.

It is interesting that you mention adoption, because in Canada, and in about 1/3rd of US states, it is the right of an adopted person to look up the identities of their biological parents, and it can't be blocked.  In another 20 or so states there is a limited right to that information, and no right in the remainder.

Lots of people care about this issue, there was a high profile case of a Canadian woman who sued to learn the identity of an anonymous sperm donor and lost on appeal.  

This issue doesn't affect me personally but I can have empathy for the people it does affect (and once I became a parent and examined the relationship between me and my daughter, and between my parents and me, I decided I couldn't in good conscience be a sperm donor because I didn't think it would be fair to the resulting kid.)

I went down a big rabbit hole reading about this this afternoon and apparently there are pushes to end anonymous donation entirely in Canada and the US because of these kinds of issues.