Blogs and Stories
When Did 'Sperm Washing' Replace Disco Dates?
Sperm washing, along with surrogates and baby showers, have all but replaced disco dates. Has the new gay world morphed into the old straight one?
“I think I’m going to have my sperm washed,” a friend said on our drive back to Manhattan from our summer places in Provincetown. What was shocking to me is not this bit of information he slipped into the usual badinage that a couple of homosexuals bat about inside an SUV, but that the term “sperm washing” itself had become so anodyne. Turning and yawning at Connecticut outside the tinted windows, I simply asked when his appointment for the procedure was scheduled at Growing Generations, the surrogacy agency favored by a certain economic stratum of gay men who want to become fathers and prefer the egg donor route to the adoption one.
“Tomorrow,” he said.
All of these fathers have a certain amount of financial stability. There is going to be a whole generation of upper-class children soon growing up with rich gay parents.
We paused for a moment of silence to consider how, if the procedure were successful, his life would change even more profoundly than when he got his diagnosis a few years ago that he was HIV positive. But the pause wasn’t so long that it signaled anything singularly profound, for we already had so many friends who had been through the surrogacy procedure—which entails choosing, for a fee, an egg donor; the in vitro fertilization of that egg with one’s sperm; and then inserting the fertilized egg, for a second fee, into another woman, the surrogate, who will carry the child to term. Attending baby showers for gay friends over these past few years has become the newest social norm in the gay community. Showers have taken the place of disco dates. One’s own DNA , it is often joked, has become the ultimate designer label. Who would have thought a stroller would become the latest status symbol?
Most of the gay men who go the surrogacy route are HIV negative, but because of the “sperm washing” technique initially developed for heterosexual couples dealing with infertility issues, HIV positive men, who are living long and healthy lives because of the drugs now available to them, are also increasingly becoming fathers. At first they had to travel to other countries to get the procedure done because American companies could not yet see the profit in it, but Dr. Anne Kiessling of Harvard, a reproductive biologist, a pioneer in the procedure, began to offer it to HIV positive men here in this country about ten years ago. (However, the oldest American child, Baby Ryan, born from this technique in upstate New York in 1999, was the son of a married heterosexual couple, the husband of which was a hemophiliac who contacted the virus from a blood transfusion.)
Kiessling at first had to set up her special embryology lab in a camper van outside the confines of her research lab for fear of the HIV virus, but now the procedure is offered in more than two dozen US surrogacy agencies.
HIV is found in the seminal fluid but not the semen cells themselves. The process is a basic one of putting the semen in a centrifuge tube, separating the fluid from the cells, and then inserting the cells that test negative for the virus into the chosen egg. This is a kind of reproductive technology in a kind of brave new world that even Aldous Huxley did not imagine.
Bringing Down Bachmann
Benjamin Sarlin is a reporter for The Daily Beast. He previously covered New York City politics for The New York Sun and has worked for talkingpointsmemo.com.
America's Hot Jobs (and Not Jobs)
The Daily Beast is dedicated to news and commentary, culture, and entertainment. We carefully curate the web’s most essential stories and bring you original must-reads from our talented contributors.
Nicolas Cage, Compulsive Spender
Jacob Bernstein is a senior reporter at The Daily Beast. Previously, he was a features writer at WWD and W Magazine. He has also written for New York magazine, Paper, and The Huffington Post.
Carrie Fisher's Crowning Moment
Kevin Sessums is the author of the New York Times bestseller Mississippi Sissy, a memoir of his childhood. He was executive editor of Andy Warhol's Interview magazine and a contributing editor of Vanity Fair and Allure. He is a contributing editor of Parade. His new memoir, I Left It on Mountain will be published by St. Martins Press.
Daniel Radcliffe: Dirty Harry
Kevin Sessums is the author of the New York Times bestseller Mississippi Sissy, a memoir of his childhood. He was executive editor of Andy Warhol's Interview magazine and a contributing editor of Vanity Fair and Allure. He is a contributing editor of Parade. His new memoir, I Left It on Mountain will be published by St. Martins Press.
Daniel Radcliffe, Dark Prince
Kevin Sessums is the author of the New York Times bestseller Mississippi Sissy, a memoir of his childhood. He was executive editor of Andy Warhol's Interview magazine and a contributing editor of Vanity Fair and Allure. He is a contributing editor of Parade. His new memoir, I Left It on Mountain will be published by St. Martins Press.
I am a little bit troubled by the idea of "sperm washing" so that HIV-positive gay couples can have children. It just seems to me to be incredibly selfish to bring a child into the world when you KNOW for certain just how uncertain your life and health will be.It's certainly something I'd never do -- for all the advances made in HIV treatment, it's still a huge risk and quality of life factor.Never mind just the possibilities of accidentally infecting your child, but the possibility of, regardless of one's wealth now, not being able to afford proper treatment or care tommorow...
I'm sure I'll take some flack from my fellow gays who will point out that white trash alcoholics with a diverse range of diseases can crank out babies, so why can't we -- but I just feel in general, just because someone *else* does it doesn't mean they should, and it certainly doesn't mean you should.Having the right to do something doesn't mean you SHOULD do it.
I wish the best to the families and hope that they're a lot more responsible than the kids in my generation... who are going out and having a lot of irresponsible bareback sex and crystal meth use because they figure "well, hey, all i'd have to do is take some pills and everything would be fine..."
Just as a quick note: Any good, reputable surrogacy agency require that ALL intended parents, gay and straight, undergo psychological evaluations to make sure that the babies-to-be will go to parents who are adequately suited to raise them. They also require that gestational surrogates undergo similar psychological evals; not only to ensure that the surrogates aren't going to go "Baby M" on the Intended Parents, but to make sure that the IP's and the GC are compatible.
to idiotking:
anyone can die at any moment so following your logic no mortal should ever have children.
I would say that gay life is being sanitized on every level. But, just like the straights, there will always be that small subset of individuals experimenting in more bizarre sexual practices. I personally really liked being gay in Europe a couple of years ago because I was in my early 20's and they still have dark rooms in almost every big city over there ;)
I would have loved to have joined the military but only if gays are openly allowed. Then it would be like one long orgy, right?
Getting married will be nice but I'm planning on moving to Spain to do so. It's one thing to have the right to do so and another to have society in general respect it and leave you in peace. I just don't see that happening anywhere totally in the US for a long time.
This was so eloquently written, and I found it enlightening and informative.
To denounce the idiotking from his throne, leaving all incapable, non-HIV positive parents aside, I'm pretty sure one isn't paying $120,000 to $140,000 for a quick scrub over. Not only would that make for a dreadful lawsuit for the company, it would also raise very strong questions and make a reason for the Republicans to party if their worst nightmare suddenly became nonexistent, or at least troublesome. To add to the "uncertainty of their own lives", even the healthiest person could get in a horrific accident and die tomorrow. Should we just not have children out of fear of the unknown? Let me know how that works out for you.
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
EVERYONE- should stop having babies for about twenty years. There a six BILLION people in the world. Give it a rest.
I'm not male or homosexual, but I am a parent and grandparent. I'm glad to hear that gays who want children and can give them a responsible, loving home are able to do so, by any means. Bravo!
not being an A-Team queer, and being 28 years seropositive, i enjoy my avuncular moments with the wee folk, in my own fashion. around 2000, while i volunteered at project inform in sf, i was asked, and found an italian doctor in sperm washing, for a hetero couple, who were apparently a magnetic couple, (one a pos, the other not for hiv).
i am glad to step in for parents in my life, i'm a good teacher, uncle, and now greatuncle. for several years i most enjoyed taking classes of 8 year-olds out into my area's arboreta, and teaching them of gondwana. it's not for every child. over the years, i have told many parents they need a garden for their gifted children, who were little engines in the earth, who'd make adams and jefferson proud. adams had it right when he told john quincy to be good, and to do good. you can see their faces light up, when you explain to them this tree grows on table mountain in south africa, or this celery pine has no leaves, they are phyllodes- and watch them bore down on their favorite plants.
you get the most amazing letters from these little charges, but then, aren't we all family? the point is we all bring something to the table, mine's more apron-stringed- and a lot more afforable then $140,000-, spiritually and chthonically.
last month, as i was building a garden near the microsoft campus in redmond, the next door neighbor's shy young granddaughter stood transfixed in the new garden. i wondered if it was because she was from south asia, these plants were foreign, and that this was a cultural moment for her. seeing it was best i let her wander off with her family through the border. being in the garden, she was happy and alive.
me, i was stove up, and it was time for my naprosyn, but by the will of the lord.
Wow, as expected, I've been denounced by people who clearly didn't read my entire post. I didn't say that people shouldn't be allowed to have kids because of their health condition -- but I did say that yes, it troubled me. If I had a chronic or life-threatening illness, I'd be very reluctant to bring a child into the world... consigning them not by chance, but by CHOICE to live with it and its ramifications. That's a key distinction you miss Seth, in your eagerness to bat at a straw man.
And Seth, it may shock you to know that yes, I've traveled extensively in Europe, and have been to plenty of clubs that have "back rooms." Interesting thing is, most of those clubs just occupy a niche just between cruising dens and bathouses here. And, similarly, most responsible guys aren't frequent visitors back there. Heck, even in Berlin it's regarded as more than a bit slutty and dangerous to go sucking anonymous dick in the back of Berghain.
Go ahead and tar me as a prude, but if you're gonna screw around a lot, you gotta do it safely, and you're better off doing it with people who aren't on the anonymous scene. True, you could do that and never suffer any ill consequences, but it's a total gamble. Here in NYC, there's an abundance of MDR chlamydia and gonnorhea that are almost impossible to shake, in no small part due to the current reversion to anything goes sexual practices. Moderation in all things, my friend... Even the really fun things.
Idiotking - Do you know when the end of your life is coming? Do you know the exact day and time you are going to die? There are two things we can't avoid in this world -- Death and Taxes. I personally think it's wonderful that technology will allow people who truly want children, who will truly love, honor, and respect their children to have them.
Accidentally infecting your child? Come on now, you know that you don't just "catch" HIV.
As a Florida reproductive attorney, I am glad to see this technology discussed outside the world of medical or ethical research.
I help many gay singles or couples satisfy their desire to have a child. With "sperm washing" gaining credibility in the medical community, HIV men with an otherwise stable health status can have a biologically related child and enjoy a relatively normal parent-child relationship.
I would suggest that "the new gay world" has not "morphed into the old straight one." There is nothing to morph here, parents are parents. The measuring stick is the quality of the relationship between parent and child, not their orientation.
Thanks for entirely ignoring my previous comment, pvedmom! Really makes it easy to have a dialogue. If you go back and read it, you might notice that I draw a bright-line difference between chance and choice. Of course there is a chance we all might get hit by a bus and die tommorow, but that is unknowable. Having a chronic or terminal illness NOW and opting to have a child, one is *intentionally CHOOSING* to put that child through whatever difficulties and traumas might be related. And make no mistake -- HIV is still a terminal illness. For all the advances made, the life of an HIV-positive person is still dependent on the drug companies keeping one step ahead of the virus -- and then hoping that those drugs don't have fatal side effects (recent concerns have involved an unusually high rate of heart attacks among gay men being treated with a common HIV drug). Again, don't set up a straw man -- tell me why it's ethical to intentionally put a child through those challenges? Just because you can do something, doesn't mean one should.
In a similar manner, there's nothing stopping someone with cancer, lou gerhig's disease, or an inoperable brain tumor from having as many kids as they like. That doesn't mean they SHOULD. I don't think anyone's rights should be curtailed, but I think that someone who would willingly, INTENTIONALLY put a child through that is letting their own narcissism and desires take precedence over other concerns.
Surely you can understand the difference between intent and accident.
As for your last aside, think of how many times in youth a kid gets cuts, scrapes, or other open wounds. Think about how often we all accidentally nick our fingers cooking and the like. Blood-blood infection is far from the most likely thing in the world, given how fragile the HIV virus is, but it *does* happen and *is* a risk.
If anyone else would respond, I'd appreciate it if they actually addressed the meat of my qualm -- the ethics of it. I don't think that sperm washing is immoral, or should be illegal, but I do think that it raises serious ethical concerns. I would never intentionally put a child through that just to satisfy my own desire to be a parent.
As a gay man from an older generation, I never wanted to have children. I have no regrets, but now that I'm a bit older, I wouldn't mind having a teenager around to help me design web pages or to figure out my more complicated electronic devices.
Parenting is serious business, but apparently not as serious as driving a car. One is required to be of a certain age and able to pass a basic skills test for driving, not so for having children.
this is perhaps one of the most unappealing stories i've had the misfortune to read. ever. and purely on the basis of the prose, and the personality that seems to lie behind them. i was actually angered by the disaffected tone.
yay for gays having children. boo for yawning, anodyne, and this guy behind the SUV wheel of any future beast content.
What is MDR chlamydia? I need a new health issue to obsess over.
Does anyone know how much it would cost just to get the sperm washed?
That $120,000 figure must be including a surrogacy, right?
The British clinics are only charging 600 pounds for sperm washing, but they require that you be a respectable monogamous heterosexual couple.
I'm an American, and me and my partner of 6 years are both queer, non monogamous, and also are former sex workers and drug users.
He is HIV positive, I am not.
I am biologically female, and I would like to have his child, so that eliminates the need for a surrogate, (and also the fear of the child being orphaned if he were to die) but we are far from wealthy, and could never afford the $120,000.
How much would this really cost us?
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.