I don't think it would be permissible, if all else fails fostering is the option.
As for who it will resemble then obviously the one who is the doner because it's the egg which carries the genes from its mother. It's like if you get a hen to hatch duck eggs the chicks will still turn out ducklings.
Analogy is flawed... hen hatching duck eggs is analogous to human hosting monkey eggs or vise versa .. different animal altogether...
[quote]
Also, a general question: if a women donates her eggs to another, does the child resemble the woman who made the donationg (looks, genes etc)?
[/quote]
Hmmm. probably the person who produces the egg and the person who fertilizes it..
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Neely: *
Also, a general question: if a women donates her eggs to another, does the child resemble the woman who made the donationg (looks, genes etc)?
[/QUOTE]
Yes, because half the baby's genes are from the egg donor and half the genes are from the father.
The baby will have no biological similarities at all with the birth mother. The child will be a ba$tard.
This is why I've never seen a scholar who ruled in favour of permitting egg donorship - I've only ever come across ruling that it is not permitted. They all say that if a woman is incapable of having a baby, then adoption is the only option.
Note that this is different from invitro fertilisation therapy (IVF), where a woman's own eggs are fertilised by her husband's in a test tube in a laboratory and then implanted back into her - I've only ever seen scholars who say that this is permissible, and never a contrary opinion.
Salaam Neely. My husband and I did some reading on this subject when I was having fertility problems. Thank goodness we didnt need to go this route but we did learn about it from a religion point of view. As far as the holy Koran says, it would be fine to be an egg donor because the father who raises the resulting child is the actual biological father. There is a problem when the father is not the biological father because of some inheritance laws - this is why adoption is not recognized in Islaam. An adopted child cannot inherit according to the holy Koran. So if the wife of a muslim couple could not make her own eggs, an egg donor would be used and the wife could carry and deliver her husbands actual child. The child would have half the genes of the husband and half the genes of the egg-donor. This is usually the route preferred over adoption since the child is biologically the father's whereas with adoption, there are no biological ties to the family. A sadder case is when the husband cannot produce viable sperm and a sperm donor is required. But in either of these cases, the resulting child is in no way a "*******" (meaning unmarried parents).
I think its a very special blessing to donate an egg so that a childless couple can have a baby of their own - what a selfless, beautiful thing to do for someone!
Actually, here in America, there is a very special need for egg donors of South Asian/Pakistani/Indian descent and they advertise for donors - will pay as much as US $10,000 for a one-time donation. I think that Muslim women are afraid to donate, that it may be un-Islaamic so they shy away from it so there are very very few donors available here.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Mamaof3: *
Actually, here in America, there is a very special need for egg donors of South Asian/Pakistani/Indian descent and they advertise for donors -
[/QUOTE]
That's interesting. Why Pak/Ind descent? Just curious :)
Well, when a couple "needs an egg" so to speak, they are mostly trying to find an egg donor of similar descent of the parents. There are enough european egg donors, ie., looking for a blonde or brunette or italian, german etc. But there is a big gap with South Asian/Pakistani/Indian egg donors. So those unfortunates who are of that descent would prefer a donor of the same descent but they arent there....Hope this helps
What about Kabab donation by men? Is it permissible? I didn’t know that Islam’s main purpose was (is??) to worry about culinary practices of today’s world. Back then, the technology was not available (despite Arabs being million years ahead of others) so you can’t say that it is not allowed.
To Mr Mad Scientist, sadly your views are the reason for the lack of egg donors of South Asian descent. Why is it that you feel a child of an egg-donor is more of a ba$tard than an adopted child who has NO biological ties to either parent?? And why do you feel that an egg-donor child is a ba$tard at all?? The egg is freely and anonomously donated, the wife carries it to term and the husband is the biological father. That in no way makes the donor "married" to the father and it in no way makes the child a motherless child. Let me ask you this...I am assuming that you are male. WHat if you marry and your wife cannot produce an egg? Would you prefer a child who you did not sire and adopt the child completely un-related to you - OR - have your wife inseminated with an egg fertilized by you making it your own child? The Islaamic rules on this are pretty clear when you read the Holy Koran but your views are not the same. So what would you do??
You may come back and complain about the lack of south asian egg donors, but a far more serious problem than that is the glut of south asian children in state-run homes who need to be adopted, but unable to find south asian adoptive parents.
The unborn children are of faaaar less importance than those children who are currently alive and need to be adopted.
And I challenge you to produce a verse from the Quran to back your viewpoint.
...and to Madhanee, by "Kabab" donation, do you mean donating spern? Well, the Islaamic rules on this are not as clear...a child needs to be raised by its biological father due to the rather strict inheritance rules. Adoption is not really recognized in Islaam. The biological father is supposed to raise his own and be responsible for them. Its a Paternal society. But then, you have to look at circumstance of the couple. Ie., if the husband is not producing sperm but the wife is ok, maybe they would prefer to have the wife inseminated with donor sperm as opposed to adopting a completely unrelated child. Tough choice either way...but not one that would send mother or father to hell!
Once again to Mr Mad scientist...yes I am aware of all of the beautiful babies that are in need of adoption. If it were easier to adopt internationally well there wouldnt be any children in need. There are international adoption laws that are so difficult to get thru, expensive and just ridiculous...If this were to change, there wouldnt be any little ones in need.
But aside from that, most couples who face infertility would choose to have a child who is related to at least one of the parents. You cannot critisize anyone for wanting to pro-create.
I will get out my books and come back to you with what we read about infertility and Islaam...may take a while, not sure where the books are but I will post back when I can.
One more question...you think its ok for an infertile couple to adopt a child unrelated to either parent. THat is a beautiful thing. But you are saying that an adopted child is OK but a child of an egg-donor is a ba$tard. WHats the difference? At least the egg-donor child is related to the father. I am not trying to say which is better - its a very personal decision to make, but in either case, the child has 2 parents.
No, not by looking at it but genetic testing will identify the biological mother. The reason that people want a "similar" donor is personal - ie., hair and eye color, height, weight. intelligence etc. So most really are looking for a donor who is at least somewhat similar to the "mother"who will carry and raise the child.