BILL ANALYSIS �
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 Hern�ndez, Bonnie |
| |Lowenthal, Mitchell, Pan, |
| |V. Manuel P�rez, 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