Does ova donation (selling) equal human trafficking?

[Universe Prince]

Some people have this opinion:

Sadly, egg donation has less to do with altruism and more to do with the exploitation of women--particularly young women and often poor women who are usually facing large debts or just trying to make ends meet. In fact, we contend that human egg harvesting is the newest form of human trafficking. [...] U.S. laws do not currently recognize the trafficking of human organs as part of human trafficking. Yet the United States did recently ratify the U.N. Trafficking Protocol and, consequently, has a commitment to bring its national legislation into harmony with its provisions. The buying and selling of human tissue represents a commodification of the human body that has already been declared an affront to the basic dignity of the human being by international laws. Egg donation is a form of trafficking in the human body.

http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/?p=1008

And some people have this opinion:

That's from a piece in First Things coauthored by an adjunct professor at George Washington University and the founding director of Hands Off Our Ovaries. They're calling for Congress to adopt a definition of trafficking that encompasses not only Emperor's Club employees, but anyone who buys a kidney on the black market or eggs on the gray one. Given the breadth of their definition, it seems to me that it would also include sperm donors and surrogate mothers. Actually, given the breadth of their definition, it seems to me that it would include any employment contract of which these activists do not approve. Even if the authors restrict themselves to adult women selling ova, it's worth reflecting on the vulgarity of this conflation. Johan Hari here describes a 14-year-old Bangladeshi girl sold into prostitution in Calcutta, forced to service 10 men a day. The average American egg vendor is probably a healthy middle class college student looking for help with tuition. If you're actually concerned about child slavery, the idea of comparing the experiences of the former and the latter might well strike you as grotesque.

http://www.reason.com/blog/show/125802.html

I feel I should also point out that the author of the second quote, Kerry Howley, has actually been an ova donor. (And written an article about it.)

Now, I contend (as some readers of other discussions may have noticed) that a person owns himself/herself. So in my opinion, selling one's ova (or sperm, to be fair to both sexes) is like selling property. And to be clear, I'm talking about unfertilized eggs, not zygotes or embryos. So, am I wrong? Is selling ova human trafficking? Is it immoral? Is it an affront to human dignity?

[Universe Prince]

Anyone?

[Xavier_Onassis]

If you can donate a sperm, How could that be different from donating an egg?
Donating a kidney is rather different, as you can reasonably expect to regenerate a sperm or egg, and if you give one away or just flush it, this will not change the quality of life in any way, at least if it is anonymous., but life with one kidney could be a major problem.

I don't see where the government should get involved with trafficking in eggs and sperm.

There are good reasons for requiring some sort of careful supervision regarding the sale of kidneys and other non regenerating organs.

I am willing to sell excess hair and fingernail clippings, by the way. Not that I have actually been saving for such a contingency arising, but I could if there was a market available...

[Amianthus]

you can reasonably expect to regenerate a sperm or egg,

Eggs are not "regenerated" - a female human is born with all the egg cells she'll ever have.

I am willing to sell excess hair and fingernail clippings, by the way. Not that I have actually been saving for such a contingency arising, but I could if there was a market available...

There is a market for human hair. It's used in wigs.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Eggs are not "regenerated" - a female human is born with all the egg cells she'll ever have.
======================================
Nonetheless, no woman ever needs to use all her eggs. There are many eggs to spare.

[kimba1]

the only problem i see is the same reason sperm donation should be logged in a database.
to insure half brothers and sister don`t get married.
but that would require mandatory genetic testing on obtaining a marraige license.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Not all incestuous unions result in horrible freaks. Most don't. The Russian Tsar Nicholas and his wife's children all were either hemophiliacs or carriers. There were some pretty dim bulbs in the Spanish Hapsburg lineage Felipe IV never seemed to figure out how to make babies and that put an end to his lineage.

The Egyptian and the Hawaiian royalty were pretty incestuous: Cleopatra married her brother Ptolomy.

I realize that they use human hair to make wigs, but I don;t think mine would be long enough. The best wig hair comes from Korean and Mongolian women, it seems. Every three weeks, Beyonc? has her hair rewoven and at least six Korean women need to have a haircut to supply her. It could be more.

Farah Fawcett embaldened entire villages, I think