190 Selected Reform R esponsa

It is, then, upon the basis of the laws developed in the debate over artificial insemination that the question of paternity involved in the ovum transplant will be decided; and since the question of paternity in artificial insemination is still a subject of disagreement between the two prime authorities, we may well say that the question of paternity and inheritance in the case of the ovum transplant is quite open and undecided. It will, of course, have to be cleared up later if the practice becomes widespread, but at present we may say it is an open question.

I am now informed that the actual situation is as follows: The sperm from the husband of the infertile woman is placed in the womb of another woman, the ovum donor, by means of artificial insemination. Thus the ovum of the ovum donor and the sperm of the husband are united and the ovum becomes impregnated. After a brief time, this impregnated ovum is put into the womb of the barren wife and she carries it to full term and a normal baby is then bom. As to this situation, it should be mentioned that the mixing of a man's seed with the ovum of a woman not his wife cannot be considered adulterous. If it were adulterous, then the child would be considered a mamzer. But it is not adulterous because in this mixture of sperm and ovum there is no bodily contact. This decision was already made by many authorities in the case of artificial insemination. So, first of all, it is to be stated that there is no Jewish legal objection to this mixture of sperm and ovum.

As for the parentage of the child, it is almost impossible to come to a definite conclusion on the basis of the Halachah , inasmuch as this situation is totally unprecedented. However, while we cannot be certain, we can speak of the probabilities involved here. In general, the tendency of Jewish law is to emphasize the relation of the child to the paternal parent. This is based first upon the Mishnah Kiddushin 3:12. The rule there given is as follows: Whenever there is a valid marriage and no sin involved, the child has the status of the male parent. Thus, for example, if a Kohen marries an Israelite woman, such a marriage is both valid and without sin, and therefore the child follows the male and is a Kohen. So, too, if an Israelite marries a Kohen woman, this again is a valid, sinless marriage, and the child again follows the male and is Israelite since his father is Israelite . In other words, the general rule of the law with regard to normal, everyday marriages is that the child has the status of the father.