But what about the inheritance?

Slate.com ran an interesting blurb today in their Human Nature column about a British woman who is receiving donated sperm from her father-in-law. It would mean that the baby would be a biological half-sibling to its "father", raising a number of questions. The health risks with older sperm are increased, but many people are also seriously concerned about the ethics of the case (it was reviewed by an ethics committee).

The father has no brother, which would be the usual family route. The article about this in the Guardian states:

It is not uncommon for families to use a sperm donor from within their family - often a brother - so that the child will have genetic ties with his or her "father", but this is thought to be the first case of a grandfather acting as a sperm donor. The family have not yet decided whether they will tell the child who his or her genetic father is, although the clinic is encouraging them to be open about that. "That's their personal decision," said Dr Ahuja.

Still, the questions about anonymous and known sperm donors that I've raised in other posts still apply. Also, I can't help wondering about the inheritance patterns from granddad to pop to kid... but presumably some lawyers are working on this problem!

What's interesting about this is that the DNA for genealogists will still match up in the future and so really no one will ever have to know (or accuse this woman of adultery!). I wonder how often this kind of thing happened in the past without the sterile medical procedures?