Viking sperm-sales are plummeting right now

The other banking crisis.

Travelling on the London Underground in recent years you have most likely seen pictures of cute, blonde babies along with the slogan “Congratulations, it’s a Viking!” plastered across the ad. The advertisement is for the Danish sperm bank Cryos, the biggest of its kind in the world.

Cryos, along with other Danish sperm banks, has been marketing Danish sperm heavily across the UK, and demand for the popular Viking “donations”, has been on the rise. The amount of UK women buying Danish sperm has grown by about 40 per cent every year since 2005, according to one Danish insemination clinic and Cryos estimates that about 10 per cent of their sperm is exported to UK clients and clinics.

A shortage of sperm elsewhere, combined with differing rules about donor anonymity from country to country, means that Denmark, which can offer both anonymous and non-anonymous sperm and can deliver it directly to individuals across the EU rather than simply to licensed clinics, is an increasingly popular destination for women seeking to become pregnant.

Since the UK made it illegal to donate sperm anonymously in 2005, the shortage of British sperm has been daunting, forcing more and more British women to look towards other countries. Thanks to its liberal laws on sperm donation, Denmark has enjoyed the brunt of this demand.

But recent events might put a stop to the Viking baby invasion. Danish laws on donation have recently been tightened after a donor was found to have passed on a rare genetic condition to at least five of the 43 babies he has fathered. Now, potential donors are interviewed, their health evaluated and their history of disease is checked – making it harder to just walk in and donate.

Far more critical is the high-profile court case, where a UK mother bought DIY sperm from Cryos and proceeded to impregnate her 14-year old adoptive daughter with the sperm. After a miscarriage, the daughter gave birth to a donor-child at the age of 16. Now the EU and Danish politicians are looking to reform the Danish laws on sperm-donation and sales, making it harder for potential mothers and fathers to acquire the popular Viking-sperm. The question is now, whether the sperm banks have a responsibility to ensure that sperm sold to individuals isn’t misused. When potential parents buy sperm through an insemination clinic, they are screened and questioned on their parenting skills – individuals buying DIY sperm are not put through the same process.

But what will this do the UK demand for Viking sperm? Marketing in London has been put on hold temporarily as the court case runs its course and sperm-sales are encountering their first slump in over seven years. In the meantime, it is clear that Danish politicians are moving towards more regulation of the Danish sperm industry. With a potential sperm-draught ahead, it might be worth considering a liberalisation of UK laws. If not for reproductive reasons, then consider the economic potential. Sperm-tourism has been on a steady rise in Denmark for the past ten years, resulting in considerable revenue growth for sperm banks and insemination clinics. Cryos, for instance, doubled their revenue within their first five years. In a time of austerity, isn’t any market with high demand worth delving into?

Can't be good for them. Photograph: Getty Images

Sandra Kilhof Nielsen is a reporter for Retail Banker International, Cards International & Electronic Payments International.

 

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

No, the battle in Momentum isn't about young against old

Jon Lansman and his allies' narrative doesn't add up, argues Rida Vaquas.

If you examined the recent coverage around Momentum, you’d be forgiven for thinking that it was headed towards an acrimonious split, judging by the vitriol, paranoia and lurid accusations that have appeared online in the last couple days. You’d also be forgiven for thinking that this divide was between a Trotskyist old guard who can’t countenance new ways of working, and hip youngsters who are filled with idealism and better at memes. You might then be incredibly bemused as to how the Trotskyists Momentum was keen to deny existed over the summer have suddenly come to the brink of launching a ‘takeover bid’.

However these accounts, whatever intentions or frustrations that they are driven by, largely misrepresent the dispute within Momentum and what transpired at the now infamous National Committee meeting last Saturday.

In the first instance, ‘young people’ are by no means universally on the side of e-democracy as embodied by the MxV online platform, nor did all young people at the National Committee vote for Jon Lansman’s proposal which would make this platform the essential method of deciding Momentum policy.

Being on National Committee as the representative from Red Labour, I spoke in favour of a conference with delegates from local groups, believing this is the best way to ensure local groups are at the forefront of what we do as an organisation.

I was nineteen years old then. Unfortunately speaking and voting in favour of a delegates based conference has morphed me into a Trotskyist sectarian from the 1970s, aging me by over thirty years.

Moreover I was by no means the only young person in favour of this, Josie Runswick (LGBT+ representative) and the Scottish delegates Martyn Cook and Lauren Gilmour are all under thirty and all voted for a delegates based national conference. I say this to highlight that the caricature of an intergenerational war between the old and the new is precisely that: a caricature bearing little relation to a much more nuanced reality.

Furthermore, I believe that many people who voted for a delegates-based conference would be rather astounded to find themselves described as Trotskyists. I do not deny that there are Trotskyists on National Committee, nor do I deny that Trotskyists supported a delegates-based conference – that is an open position of theirs. What I do object is a characterisation of the 32 delegates who voted for a delegates-based conference as Trotskyists, or at best, gullible fools who’ve been taken in.  Many regional delegates were mandated by the people to whom they are accountable to support a national conference based on this democratic model, following broad and free political discussion within their regions. As thrilling as it might be to fantasise about a sinister plot driven by the shadow emperors of the hard Left against all that it is sensible and moderate in Momentum, the truth is rather more mundane. Jon Lansman and his supporters failed to convince people in local groups of the merits of his e-democracy proposal, and as a result lost the vote.

I do not think that Momentum is doomed to fail on account of the particular details of our internal structures, providing that there is democracy, accountability and grassroots participation embedded into it. I do not think Momentum is doomed to fail the moment Jon Lansman, however much respect I have for him, loses a vote. I do not even think Momentum is doomed to fail if Trotskyists are involved, or even win sometimes, if they make their case openly and convince others of their ideas in the structures available.

The existential threat that Momentum faces is none of these things, it is the propagation of a toxic and polarised political culture based on cliques and personal loyalties as opposed to genuine political discussion on how we can transform labour movement and transform society. It is a political culture in which those opposed to you in the organisation are treated as alien invaders hell-bent on destroying it, even when we’ve worked together to build it up, and we worked together before the Corbyn moment even happened. It is a political culture where members drag others through the mud, using the rhetoric of the Right that’s been used to attack all of us, on social and national media and lend their tacit support to witch hunts that saw thousands of Labour members and supporters barred from voting in the summer. It is ultimately a political culture in which our trust in each other and capacity to work together on is irreparably eroded.

We have a tremendous task facing us: to fight for a socialist alternative in a global context where far right populism is rapidly accruing victories; to fight for the Labour Party to win governmental power; to fight for a world in which working class people have the power to collectively change their lives and change the societies we live in. In short: there is an urgent need to get our act together. This will not be accomplished by sniping about ‘saboteurs’ but by debating the kind of politics we want clearly and openly, and then coming together to campaign from a grassroots level upwards.

Rida Vaquas is Red Labour Representative on Momentum National Committee.