egg donor antitrust lawsuit

[Anonymous]

Yes - they are paying market and plus part of the market is the "premium" broker segment. I don't see antitrust case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a PhD from HYP, blue eyes, division one athlete. You better believe my eggs - which are not a body part as they are shed every month - are worth more than other eggs. Same goes for any East Asian woman. There are very few Asian donors. Of the price were higher maybe more would donate. I, for one, would. I'm not donating for a paltry 5k. Not worth the medical risks at that price.

Your eggs are worth what people are willing to pay. If 5k is too little, then don't donate. You assume the ideal is blonde hair and blue eyes, which is a false assumption. I would pay more for the Harvard PhD, but the blonde hair is nothing g

The blonde hair is actually problematic.

Where does she say she is blonde?

I'm not so sure your eggs would fetch top dollar. If you have a Ph.D, you are likely 25+ and many people favor younger egg donors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What makes you think they need to pay more to get egg donors? They don't.

Yes they do. Shady Grove upped its offer from $5,000 to $7,000 last year (maybe even earlier) and agencies are offering premiums for egg donors of ethnicities from which donor eggs are hard to get.

In Europe where payment is lower and anonymity is not allowed, it is very hard to get donor eggs and donor sperm. Many, many Europeans travel for their treatment.

I am grateful that it was readily available here in the U.S., albeit expensive.

Without the cap, I think the costs will go up. Clinics will do what they can to keep it affordable enough to keep patients. I have no objection to the donors getting more of what I pay, and the clinic just having lower profits, but it could go the other way, where clinics insist on maintaining their level of profit and less people can afford donor egg.

[Anonymous]

but if compensation goes up, won't supply also rise to meet that demand and eventually prices will float down? I guess its all a question of market efficiency vs controls.

I for one would now give me eggs for free to my friends who need them but alas, despite fairly good genetics (and that ivy phd) I'm too old. and when I was young, I had no idea that this was a thing, or knew about infertility, although there were many ads in my college newspaper looking for students willing to 'donate".

[Anonymous]

After 5 IVF cycles (own eggs, ultimately successful), I'm really confused why this thread is turning into a pitting of the economic interests of those undergoing IF treatments and the donors who might be the key to making those treatments successful. I think it's pretty clear that for some women, $5-10K is nowhere near the market rate for their eggs (especially when you consider that might not exceed the salary they would have earned during that period). I think it's also pretty clear that $50-100K is outside the ability of some IF couple's to pay...which isn't so different from the prices set by the physicians performing the procedures as well. But we are not so willing to criticize the doctors and clinics for making money off of these procedures (who aren't risking their health) as we are the women who are putting their bodies at risk.

I don't know the right price for a donated egg...and I do understand that there are some important ethical considerations surrounding eugenics that emerge when you allow there to be such massive price differentials. But if the concern is finances, the right argument is not to unfairly compensate egg donors, it's to argue that insurance coverage should cover the additional costs. Because the premise of the argument seems to be that it's not fair that people of lower economic means wouldn't be able to pay higher rates...without any regard to "donors" who are making these treatments possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love how patronizing it is towards women who donate. Women are always portrayed as needing paternal guidance as to how they choose to use their bodies. If they got paid more, they would be less able to decide what risks they would like to take with their bodies? While I do not think they are paid enough compared to what the doctors are making, their eggs by themselves, with no medical intervention, actually have no value. They may have a potential value, but only if they choose to sell them or procreate with them. Wasted every month of their lives, no matter how elite they are.

Okay, but to the couple that needs a DE to conceive, their highly paid doctor also has no value without the egg. Similar arguments can be made for everything from copper ore to corn in a corn field. Just because a donor's egg isn't sufficient to have a baby doesn't make it unnecessary...meaning it does have value.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I am also 41 and had similar symptoms. However, they stimulate younger women differently, esp. for egg donations. They don't need the extreme dosages we do in order to respond. I am not saying it's impossible to get OHSS from egg donation, but it's very different from what you and I had to go through physically at 41. Additionally, use of Lupron eliminates the possibility of OHSS and it's used more on younger patients.

OHSS is more common in younger women.