BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 2356 Page 1 ASSEMBLY THIRD READING AB 2356 (Skinner) As Amended May 8, 2012 Majority vote HEALTH 13-5 -------------------------------- |Ayes:|Monning, Ammiano, Atkins, | | |Bonilla, Eng, Gordon, | | |Hayashi, | | |Roger Hernández, Bonnie | | |Lowenthal, Mitchell, Pan, | | |V. Manuel Pérez, Williams | | | | |-----+--------------------------| |Nays:|Logue, Garrick, Mansoor, | | |Nestande, Smyth | | | | -------------------------------- SUMMARY : Provides that a recipient of sperm donated by a sexually intimate partner (SIP) of the recipient for reproductive use may waive a second or repeat testing of that donor for evidence of infection with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), agents of viral hepatitis (HBV and HCV), syphilis, and human T lymphotrophic virus (HTLV), as specified, if the recipient is informed of the donor testing requirements, and signs a written waiver, as specified. Exempts physicians and surgeons from: liability for damages for any cause of action; and, disciplinary action against his or her professional license, or subject to a professional association peer review, as defined, for providing insemination or advanced reproductive technology services using sperm from a SIP of the recipient, as specified. Specifically, this bill : 1)Provides that a recipient of sperm donated by a SIP of the recipient for reproductive use may waive a second or repeat testing of that donor for evidence of infection with HIV, HBV and HCV, syphilis, and HTLV, as specified. 2)Defines SIP of the recipient to include a known or designated donor to whose sperm the recipient has previously been exposed in a nonmedical setting in an attempt to conceive. 3)Exempts a physician and surgeon from liability for damages for any AB 2356 Page 2 cause of action for providing insemination or advanced reproductive technology services using sperm from a SIP of the recipient when the physician and surgeon has obtained the informed consent of the recipient, who acknowledges and accepts the risks of using sperm that has not undergone quarantine and repeat testing, as specified. 4)Exempts a physician and surgeon from any disciplinary action against his or her professional license, or subject to professional association peer review by a peer review body, as defined, for providing insemination or advance reproductive technology services using sperm from a SIP of the recipient when the physician and surgeon has obtained the informed consent of the recipient who acknowledges and accepts the risks of using sperm that has not undergone quarantine and repeat testing, as specified. 5)Exempts a clinical laboratory that is owned and operated by a physician and surgeon or tissue bank that is owned and operated by a physician and surgeon from any disciplinary action against its license for providing insemination or advanced reproductive technology services using sperm from a SIP of the recipient when the physician and surgeon has obtained the informed consent of the recipient, who acknowledges and accepts the risks of using sperm that has not undergone quarantine and repeat testing, as specified. 6)Exempts a physician and surgeon from liability for a cause of action based upon discrimination against an individual or group if the physician and surgeon refuses to provide insemination or advanced reproductive technology services using sperm from a SIP of the recipient if the physician and surgeon determines that the insemination or services do not meet the 2008 American Society for Reproductive Medicine guidelines for gamete and embryo donation. 7)Specifies numerous findings and declarations, including the following: a) Single women and same-sex female couples using a known donor are unable to access the same fertility services as women seeking to conceive using a male partner; and, b) Federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations require extensive testing, except when the donor is a SIP. AB 2356 Page 3 This term is not defined in regulations, but its explicit purpose is to allow donation without testing when the recipient has already been exposed. Thus, this term can be interpreted to include women who have already attempted at-home inseminations with their donors' sperm because they have already been exposed through these attempts. 8)States that until the term SIP is explicitly defined by the FDA, it is the intent of the Legislature to provide a clarification that, for the purposes of tissues donated for reproductive use, SIP includes any woman who has been exposed to the donor's sperm outside of a medical setting. 9)Limits the definition of SIP to this bill and is not intended to have any effect on any provision of the Family Code, including the definition of a "donor" for purposes of determining legal parentage of a child. 10)Makes other technical, non-substantive, and conforming changes. FISCAL EFFECT : None COMMENTS : Equality California and the National Center for Lesbian Rights are the sponsors of this measure. According to the sponsors, this bill would provide same-sex female couples or single women seeking to conceive using a known sperm donor access to certain fertility services on the same terms as different-sex couples. According to the author, a woman who receives fertility services with a male partner is able to use fresh sperm for insemination, greatly increasing the likelihood of the woman conceiving. However, a woman who receives fertility services with a known male donor can only receive frozen sperm, reducing her chances of conceiving. Women using a known donor for an at home insemination attempt have already been exposed to the donor's semen, the same way women with a male partner have been exposed. However, due to ambiguity in the law, physicians will only inseminate women using a known donor with frozen sperm after the donor has been screened for sexually transmitted diseases. Typically, for these women sperm must be quarantined for six months and re-screened before insemination. Not only is frozen sperm less effective, but the six months waiting period can reduce the chances of becoming pregnant for women over 40. Insemination with frozen sperm is also significantly more expensive than insemination with fresh sperm. Analysis Prepared by : Rosielyn Pulmano / HEALTH / (916) 319-2097 AB 2356 Page 4 FN: 0003512