Something not justified by biology or economics

May 25, 2007 21:06 GMT  ·  By

You may expect that compensation rates for males which donate sperm would be significantly lower than for women donating eggs, but a recent investigation made by UCLA Sociologist Rene Almeling revealed discrepancies that cannot be explained by either market forces or the biological differences, defying the basic law of supply and demand. "From compensation rates to the smallest details of donor relations, sperm donors are less valued than egg donors. Egg donors are treated like gold, while sperm donors are perceived as a dime a dozen.", said Almeling.

The discrepancies persist even if the egg donors supply languishes, while suitable sperm donors are a rare stuff.

In fact, just a tiny fraction of the male population has a sperm count high enough to be employed for donation, a reason amongst others for which over 90 % of sperm bank applicants are rejected. "Based on the availability of donors alone, you would expect the abundance of potential egg donors to drive down compensation fees and the scarcity of potential sperm donors to drive up their fees. But I found just the opposite", said Almeling.

Almeling's research is based on interviews with 25 staff members at two sperm banks and two egg agencies, during the past five years.

Egg donors in large cities can obtain up to $5,000 per donation, no matter the outcome, plus what the recipient couples offer: thank-you notes, small tokens of appreciation and even cash bonuses.

Instead, male donors get $50-75 per donation, and this only when their samples fit the high fertility standards required. A sperm donor makes on an entire year as much as their female counterparts on a six-week cycle, but only when they deliver more than the required one sample weekly. Even so, their earnings are smaller as they can miss weekly sessions or their samples may fail the fertility requirements.

Women can donate up to three times in a year, and their fees rise with each completed cycle.

Sperm donors must also refrain from sex for two days before the donation, to avoid failing the fertility standards; illness or stress also affect negatively the sperm count. "Sperm donors basically have to schedule their sex lives for a year", Almeling said.

Female donors must also refrain from having sex, but just for six weeks. However, the women have to experience some bodily invasiveness: a six-week hormone therapy, which can inflict severe complications in 1 to 2 % of cases, and the egg-extraction procedure, which is uncomfortable and induces severe complications in less than 0.1 %.

Women were also repeatedly reminded of their generosity, while sperm donation was regarded like any other job. "Staff at egg agencies constantly thank women and encourage them to think about what a wonderful difference they're making in the lives of recipients. The sperm bank staff is appreciative, but men aren't told how amazing they are and what a great gift they're giving. They're treated more like reproductive service workers. And they're only paid when they produce an acceptable sample." said Almeling.

The differences tend to be justified through biological reasons: egg extraction is more difficult and risky and the female body disposes by a limited supply of eggs.

But the huge oversupply of women willing to be donors points out the fact that eggs are not so scarce for couples willing to receive them. "Cultural norms of parenthood, which are perpetuated though marketing efforts, interact with these biological understandings to produce the differences in market prices. Both eggs and egg donors are more highly valued than sperm and sperm donors, where it is not just reproductive material but visions of middle-class, American femininity and masculinity and motherhood and fatherhood that are marketed and purchased," she Almeling.

The application process for donors also was biased on "gendered stereotypes of selfless motherhood and distant fatherhood."

Despite the big compensation for egg donors, women who pointed out a financial reason behind their involvement were always rejected in favor of the applicants who stated a more altruistic desire, like the desire to "help" infertile couples. "While most egg donors will never meet their genetic children, women are expected to reproduce well-worn patters of 'naturally' caring, helpful femininity, guiltily hiding any interest that they might have in the promise of thousands of dollars. This ruse is not demanded of sperm donors. Men, who are more likely to be contacted through the banks' identity release programs, often do not even consider that children will result from regular deposits at the sperm bank."

In fact, in one case, a sperm donor was shocked to find out his sperm was used in conception. "I hadn't really thought about the fact there were going to be pregnancies," he said.