We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
A LANDMARK CASE in the Supreme Court this week saw the status quo remain in place – that the genetic mother of a child born to a surrogate could not appear on its birth certificate.
According to Ireland’s current laws, genetics only counts when it comes to fatherhood, not motherhood.
To be a legal mother, the child must be born out of your body.
It seems like an unbelievable position for the court to take but the Chief Justice underlined that she had no other option. It was not the job of the courts to create a “golden rule” for motherhood. It was up to the lawmakers of the country. She basically told the big wigs in Leinster House to pull the finger out on this one and come up with some legislation on surrogacy.
As a solicitor for one of the sisters involved in the case said outside the court, “Surrogacy is happening… These aren’t the only family involved in this particular kind of case.”
And there are potentially hundreds more who will need legal clarity in the near future.
As a visiting fertility specialist told an audience at a same-sex parenting seminar held in Dublin’s city centre this week, “there is a global revolution happening and Ireland is just entering it”.
Dr Brandon Bankowski of Oregon Reproductive Medicine was one of a number of experts to speak to more than 50 same-sex couples on Wednesday evening in the Westbury Hotel.
He was addressing those couples as ones who had “made the first step… to dream of becoming parents”.
In an earlier interview with TheJournal.ie, he said there are options available to gay and lesbian couples, such as co-parenting and adoption but he believes, “The desire to have a genetic offspring is really powerful for a lot of people.”
“There is a time for everything. We’re excited to be here at the start of it in Ireland – it takes a while to introduce this option. A lot of couples may have given up on the dream, which they don’t have to.”
That was the message too of Conor Pendergrast, the adult son of a lesbian couple who grew up in Ireland.
He told the room of prospective parents:
I am the human face on the product of what could be a very long process. And to say, heh, look it’s great at the end of it. You get a son.
How does it work?
Oregon Reproductive Medicine (ORM) and North West Surrogacy Centre (NWSC) have been providing third-party reproductive services for over two decades.
In their areas in Oregon and California, it is no longer a remarkable trade.
“It’s not even interesting to us anymore, in the sense that it’s so well accepted,” John Chally of NWSC tells TheJournal.ie. “That is driven by the acceptance of same-sex marriage around the world.
There is that children’s saying: First comes love, then comes marriage, then comes baby….
“At this point in the process, they’ve been in love for a long time. Then they have a culture that is accepting of their marriages. It’s then a very natural development that those couples would be looking to complete their families with children.”
Chally, along with co-founder Sandra Hodgson, began processing same-sex adoptions in 1989.
“What we realised first off, they actually are fairly easy to do. We thought the individual birth mothers would never choose a gay or lesbian family. The experience was extraordinarily different to that. The genius of the programme was asking the birth parents if they would be comfortable placing their child with a gay or lesbian family. To our pleasant surprise, 40% said yes. Interestingly, that percentage hasn’t changed very much since 1989.”
Surrogacy options for same-sex couples were just as easy, according to Chally, as establishing legal parentage in the courts for both parents was a straight-forward process.
Oregon also allows for compensated surrogacy – meaning the woman who carries the child is allowed to be paid for her work.
And it is a job for many of them.
“They take it very seriously,” says Chally, when asked about what motivates a woman to carry a stranger’s child.
It’s always complex. What we know is that the money does play a role. There are other things as well. The surrogates that come to us – almost all, have had good pregnancies. That’s why some women look at it and they think she’s crazy.
“Some women liked their pregnancies, liked how it feels, love the idea of providing for another family. They talk about it in that context. Each one of our surrogates has to have had a child and be raising that child. They look at couples unable to have children, and they feel really good about that.”
There are other rules that NWSC and ORM have put in place for potential surrogates: they must be between 21 and 40 years old; they have their criminal, medical and financial records examined; they cannot have had more than five pregnancies; their homes have to pass a social worker’s inspection.
The money they receive is described by most as “not life changing” with women using the average $30,000 payment for deposits for a house, college funds for their children or, sometimes, a first holiday for their family.
Hogdson says the motivation is often about bringing more children into the world.
“My husband and I were watching a TV show one day where a woman was a surrogate. I thought, I could do that! I could give someone a baby! We talked about being a surrogate for six to seven months before starting the process,” says Brandi, who gave birth to Landan for Adam and Sharon.
The couple had been trying for pregnancy for four years but could not conceive. Today, they have become close friends with their surrogate, although this isn’t the case 100% of the time, according to Chally.
“When you enter into a surrogacy relationship, you don’t know what it’s going to be like. It starts out as a business relationship but you hope that it will be more,” Sharon says. “I’ve never met this person before and all of a sudden you’re signing a contract and she’s going to carry a child for you.
You want to be involved, but she has her own life too, so it’s a little challenging to know how to interact socially. I was surprised by how close we became with Brandi—we have become really good friends.
The cost
Dr Bankowsk shows the room a slideshow picture of his ‘embryos clean room’ in Oregon. It is state of the art, built by Intel engineers. It is the reason that he boasts a 90% live birth rate in his clinic, he says.
To those sitting in the audience, it must scream dollar bills.
Indeed, one of first questions asked after the presentations was the cost of the whole process. Including the $30,000 surrogacy fees, intending parents should expect to spend about $100,000 (€80,000).
It will be a barrier for a lot of couples, admits Chally.
“But often, it becomes a family affair. Parents of gay children sometimes feel a sense of loss because they think they will not have grandchildren. This process is transforming for them and they are often very involved – from a financial point of view, but also coming to the initial meetings and appointments.”
Acceptance
The barriers to parenting were the subject of the majority of the audience’s questions following the presentations. The length of time its takes? The cost? Is a civil partnership or marriage is required? What if one of the parents has HIV? Who appears on the birth cert? What nationality is the child?
What didn’t come up was whether there were any parenting difficulties once the child came along. It seems the American experts were correct in their assumptions that people are comfortable with couples in love becoming parents.
Conor was not asked about whether he was bullied. Or whether his life was harder because he had two mothers instead of two fathers.
One former teacher said that he has seen from Ireland’s schools that co-parenting just “isn’t an issue”.
The barriers to parenthood for Ireland’s gay and lesbian couples are exactly where the Chief Justice said they were. In Leinster House.
One of the men in the audience, Ben Murray, said he was at the very earliest stages of contemplating the idea of becoming a father.
He came, he said, more out of intrigue and to see whether it would all “be too much” – being the test cases before there is legal certainty.
His conclusion at the end of the night? He said it was easy to be excited and in awe at the wonderful stories told by new parents and giving surrogates but he was hit hardest by the “hard reality” of the dubious legal situation.
“There is real hope,” he say, “But another reality.”
Health Minister Leo Varadkar said this week that he will be bring a memorandum for a Assisted Reproduction Bill to his colleagues before the end of the year so that surrogacy, gamete donation and other third-party reproduction issues can be legislated for.
Twenty years on, maybe the global revolution has landed in Ireland.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
It came to war, this is a war that the U.S. could not win. It would cost them an absolute fortune given the logistics, and their production capabilities are nowhere near what China’s are now. China is a juggernaut of heavy industry.
@Phil Magee: Hi Phil, The US armed forces vastly outnumber both China and Russia when it comes to arms several times over. The US has a massive army. No comparison. Under Obama the US had a weak commander but not now. Trump will not be pushed around by Chinese threats,
China don’t gave the immediate naval power the USA does. But USA can’t win it without nuclear weapons and China has them too
@Eye_c_u: Agree the nuclear option will cancel out any aggression but the US army dwarfs Russia/China/EU combined. It is HUGE. China are no threat to the US.
China is not threatening to attack the US. However the US is making threatening comments towards China. Threats don’t help anyone when both countries posess nuclear arms.
@Burke John: China couldn’t win away from home, but the U.S. would never conquer China, it would cost too much. If they couldn’t properly defeat Afghanistan how would they take on a country 20 times bigger with a billion inhabitants?
@Burke John: Yes, but they fail to defeat the Taliban in Afghanistan and the insurgents in Iraq. War is a funny old business as Napoleon and Hitler found out to their cost.
@Burke John: Also, China has almost 1 million more active servicemen than the divided states of america, they can build machines several times faster than anyone else. It would not take them long to build a bigger airforce if they wanted to.
@Phil Magee: China have been bullying their neighbours in the South China Sea for years since Obama took office. China saw Americas weakness as their opportunity. I think them days are over.
In this case the US would not be facing China alone. Vietnam Indonesia and the Philippines are also in dispute with China. And logistics would not be a big a problem for the US as it would seem. They have naval bases in the Philippines and Japan right in the disputed zone.
As ever the U.S is the primary aggressor. John Pilger explains:
“Today, more than 400 American military bases encircle China with missiles, bombers, warships and, above all, nuclear weapons. From Australia north through the Pacific to Japan, Korea and across Eurasia to Afghanistan and India, the bases form, says one US strategist, ‘the perfect noose’…….
In 2015, in high secrecy, the US staged its biggest single military exercise since the Cold War. This was Talisman Sabre; an armada of ships and long-range bombers rehearsed an ‘Air-Sea Battle Concept for China’ – ASB – blocking sea lanes in the Straits of Malacca and cutting off China’s access to oil, gas and other raw materials from the Middle East and Africa.
It is such a provocation, and the fear of a US Navy blockade, that has seen China feverishly building strategic airstrips on disputed reefs and islets in the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea. Last July, the UN Permanent Court of Arbitration ruled against China’s claim of sovereignty over these islands. Although the action was brought by the Philippines, it was presented by leading American and British lawyers and can be traced to then US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.”
https://newint.org/features/2016/12/01/the-coming-war-on-china/
@Burke John: I’m not sure you understand the scale here. Sure, Americas military might is greater, but they would not be able to pit all their might against China. Remember when China shot down the spy plane? G.W.Bush, who went to war because his daddy went to war, demanded the plane back, he got it back, or at least the shell of it, 6 weeks later. China does not fear America, they may not be as powerful but are powerful enough to face them down.
Patches: So China is not being aggressive laying claim to vast areas of both international and other nations territorial waters. Is that your claim?
@Mick Jordan: Naval bases in any country mean very little without the ability to protect themselves, I doubt very much that the Philippines is much more than a utility. Considering that the Australian navy is probably the biggest naval force in the West Pacific region I don’t see them getting overly concerned wirh the Chinese at present. If America is just looking for a fight they couldn’t have picked a stronger opponent than China. Trump is a fool if he thinks he can get them to back down over the South China Sea.
@Mick Jordan:
The article is by John Pilger. If you believe you know better you should contact him.
Chris. The Indonesians have the Second biggest Military in the region followed by the Vietnamese. Look at the areas that China are laying claim to. Air cover alone would be a major problem for the Chinese. Where both the US and the other nations in dispute with China are slap bang in the centre. And the US have two Carrier Battle groups in the Pacific and could move even more in from the Indian Ocean if needed. China knows if it came down to a shooting war their naval forces would get severely mauled. What they are currently doing is simple bullying it’s smaller neighbours. And like any bully if a bigger kid puts it up to them they back down
Patches. Pilger is well noted for his anti US ramblings. But it was you who posted his remarks so that would suggest you agree with them. So my question to you still stands.
@Mick Jordan:
Your question can stand and wait. There’s a good lad.
Meanwhile here’s some more context from the great war corespondent Pilger:
“Seldom a day passes when China is not elevated to the status of a “threat”. According to Admiral Harry Harris, the US Pacific commander, China is “building a great wall of sand in the South China Sea”.
What he is referring to is China building airstrips in the Spratly Islands, which are the subject of a dispute with the Philippines – a dispute without priority until Washington pressured and bribed the government in Manila and the Pentagon launched a propaganda campaign called “freedom of navigation”.
What does this really mean? It means freedom for American warships to patrol and dominate the coastal waters of China. Try to imagine the American reaction if Chinese warships did the same off the coast of California.”
http://johnpilger.com/articles/a-world-war-has-begun-break-the-silence-
Patches. You seem to be a fan of Pilger. And such agree with his Anti US stance. As such you answer my question. You don’t think China is the Aggressor in this case even though the International Maritime Court and the UN disagree.
@Mick Jordan:
As you seem to believe this is a Q&A session. Tell us who you think is easily the most aggressive imperial power on the planet since WWII?
Here’s a clue for you:
“The disquieting reality of the world we live in is that American efforts to destroy democracy, even as it pretends to champion it, have left the world less peaceful, less just and less hopeful……………..
To place the coup in Ukraine in historical context, this is at least the 80th time the United States has organized a coup or a failed coup in a foreign country since 1953……………….
Noam Chomsky calls William Blum’s classic, Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions since World War II, “Far and away the best book on the topic.” If you’re looking for historical context for what you are reading or watching on TV about the coup in Ukraine, Killing Hope will provide it. The title has never been more apt as we watch the hopes of people from all regions of Ukraine being sacrificed on the same altar as those of people in Iran (1953); Guatemala(1954); Thailand (1957); Laos (1958-60); the Congo (1960); Turkey (1960, 1971 & 1980); Ecuador (1961 & 1963); South Vietnam (1963); Brazil (1964); the Dominican Republic (1963); Argentina (1963); Honduras (1963 & 2009); Iraq (1963 & 2003); Bolivia (1964, 1971 & 1980); Indonesia (1965); Ghana (1966); Greece (1967); Panama (1968 & 1989); Cambodia (1970); Chile (1973); Bangladesh (1975); Pakistan (1977); Grenada (1983); Mauritania (1984); Guinea (1984); Burkina Faso (1987); Paraguay (1989); Haiti (1991 & 2004); Russia (1993); Uganda (1996);and Libya (2011). This list does not include a roughly equal number of failed coups, nor coups in Africa and elsewhere in which a U.S. role is suspected but unproven.”
http://www.alternet.org/world/americas-coup-machine-destroying-democracy-1953
Patches. Have the US laid claim to territory since WWII? China is and so has Russia.
@Mick Jordan:
Did you always cheer for the heroic cowbows against those damn Injuns?
No. I cheer for democratic nations standing up to dictatorships that threaten or endanger other smaller nations.
@Burke John: During the Vietnam war the US lost a lot of men. The supply lines were just too long. Nothing has changed in my opinion.
@Mick Jordan: The bigger kid didn’t do so well in Vietnam. The Chinese will not back down and if anything they will break America on land and sea. Mark my words it isn’t worth the effort for Trump to send in the navy unless he is prepared to keep them there perminently. The countries are not at war with each other so best to learn to live with each other with mutual respect.
Hallelujah. That’s where you are wrong. Vietnam was a land based conflict where the North Vietnamese could depend on Southern Support. This would be a Naval conflict where the US and those other countries involved hold all the cards. The majority of the region claimed by China borders those countries and makes China’s logistics much more difficult especially the further South they go.
@hallelujah: Exactly, the Americans made a big political deal about their war dead returning home in body bags from Vietnam. While the Vietnamese just went quietly about burying theirs. A war against China would be too big a cost for America to contemplate.
Chris. Vietnam was a totally different scenario as I have outlined above.
@Mick Jordan: Actually Mick, the Vietnam war started after Vietnamese gunboats attacked a provoking American warship. The Americans just couldn’t stop themselves from getting involved thinking that it would be easy against the communist regime. Surely they must have learned some lessons from that war.
@Mick Jordan: So has Isreal….
But you are ignoring the simple fact that Vietnam was a land based war where the North had logictical support from supporters in the South. China doesn’t have that support in the disputed region, quite the opposite in fact. And as it would entail no ground forces but would be a Naval/Air war China is at a distinct disadvantage.
@Phil Magee:total BS. The US has 400 bases in that region already and money is absolutely 100% not a problem. The looting and future dominance of any of America’s targets pays dividends in the long run.
Phil the us have ring fenced China with military bases. They are not the military juggernaut a lot of people think they are.
Bless. Mick thinks the U.S is a “democratic nation”. That’s sweet:)
@Patches O Houlihan:
I saw the documentary “The Coming War on China” on ITV just before Christmas.
I disagree with John Pilger on some issues but I have a lot of respect for him. I’m aware that he exposed the US government’s policy of supporting the Khmer Rouge after it had been removed from power by the Vietnamese military.
How would you describe it the Patches?
@Mick Jordan:
An imperialistic tyrant stuck in 18th century thinking.
China has this and America has that, you lot on here expecting to get a ticket to watch the show, don’t bother you will be in it, it will effect every nation on the planet, so ye can cancel the popcorn, and take up the nuclear attack position, find a room in your house that has a good level floor, lie flat on the floor, pull both feet in until your knees is at an angle of 45% then put your your arms under your legs between the thigh muscle and calf muscle gripping both shin bones firmly, pushing as far forward as you can, and you should be able to kiss your a**e goodbye….
No fan of trump, but this is a scaremongering piece to suggest that Trump will cause a conflict over the South China Sea territory. The US under Obama has already moved massive naval assets into this sphere of the globe and he admonished Beijing a number of times in regards to this issue. In August under the Obama regime three b1 bombers were sent over the area as a show of strength, these planes are capable of carrying a nuclear payload. It’s a much more complicated mess then suggesting it’s limited to the US backing Taiwan or the one china question. Japan, the Philippines, Korea both north and south all have claims on the territory, which is currently in international waters. There have already been many clashes with Chinease naval forces in the area, much more serious than the one with the Indian naval vessel over the disputed territory. Trump may be a nut, but this has been brewing for many years, and if you are going to do a piece on this powder keg do a balanced and fair one covering all the nations and their claims rather than a puff piece to scare people about trump , you also forgot to mention the landing strips that have been built on the reefs or the the Sam missiles the Chinease have moved there already or the fact they seized the us naval drone in December
I don’t see America threatening Israel when it comes to occupying land they don’t own. America should have learned their lessons from the Vietnam war not to meddle in Asia. The Chinese won’t be pushed around by Trump and his cronies, while Russia looks on with amusement.
John Pilger released a new documentary a few months ago called the coming war on China and it’s really interesting. America has been building military bases and pointing missiles at China for years, they have totally surrounded China. The US want what’s known as total spectral dominance across the globe. It’s apparently ok if the US has ‘interest’ in any part of the world but if any other country has interest in something they need the approval from the US military. The western media are being economic with the truth about the China situation too, they won’t tell you that the US is being a bully and an aggressor in the south China Sea.
@cryptoskitzo: trailer for the documentary https://youtu.be/G3hbtM_NJ0s the full film is available on YouTube too!
Pilger. Has spewing Anti US rethoric for decades. And the only people that take him seriously are those of similar leanings.
@Mick Jordan: That are against a hegemonic tyrant raging war across the planet. Let me know when you have even one of the credentials of Pilger and maybe your ‘opinion’ might be worth one of his words.
@cryptoskitzo: Reminds me of before Japan attacked the U.S. http://www.globalresearch.ca/fall-1941-pearl-harbor-and-the-wars-of-corporate-america/28159
Surely there is a diplomatic solution available. Surely the UN or someone can come up with a solution letting everyone save face without a battle.
In Vietnam, President Johnson said in 1965- “we will not talk to North Vietnam, we will not surrendar also” and sent in the US army.
In 1968, half a million US troops later, President Johnson ” lets talk to the North Vietnamese, and try and achieve peace”
China attacks the U.S. and looses the war and then China is broken up into smaller democratic countries?
Rember the Falkland Islands .a bit similar kindda
Use precise geolocation data. Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Store and/or access information on a device. Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development.
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work.
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partners. They may be used by those companies to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant adverts on other sites. They do not store directly personal information, but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet device. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalisation. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we have added to our pages. If you do not allow these cookies then these services may not function properly.
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not be able to monitor our performance.
Cookies, device or similar online identifiers (e.g. login-based identifiers, randomly assigned identifiers, network based identifiers) together with other information (e.g. browser type and information, language, screen size, supported technologies etc.) can be stored or read on your device to recognise it each time it connects to an app or to a website, for one or several of the purposes presented here.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times an ad is presented to you).
Information about your activity on this service (such as forms you submit, content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (for example, information from your previous activity on this service and other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (that might include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present advertising that appears more relevant based on your possible interests by this and other entities.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on your advertising profiles, which can reflect your activity on this service or other websites or apps (like the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects.
Information about your activity on this service (for instance, forms you submit, non-advertising content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (such as your previous activity on this service or other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (which might for example include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present content that appears more relevant based on your possible interests, such as by adapting the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find content that matches your interests.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on your content personalisation profiles, which can reflect your activity on this or other services (for instance, the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects. This can for example be used to adapt the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find (non-advertising) content that matches your interests.
Information regarding which advertising is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine how well an advert has worked for you or other users and whether the goals of the advertising were reached. For instance, whether you saw an ad, whether you clicked on it, whether it led you to buy a product or visit a website, etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of advertising campaigns.
Information regarding which content is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine whether the (non-advertising) content e.g. reached its intended audience and matched your interests. For instance, whether you read an article, watch a video, listen to a podcast or look at a product description, how long you spent on this service and the web pages you visit etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of (non-advertising) content that is shown to you.
Reports can be generated based on the combination of data sets (like user profiles, statistics, market research, analytics data) regarding your interactions and those of other users with advertising or (non-advertising) content to identify common characteristics (for instance, to determine which target audiences are more receptive to an ad campaign or to certain contents).
Information about your activity on this service, such as your interaction with ads or content, can be very helpful to improve products and services and to build new products and services based on user interactions, the type of audience, etc. This specific purpose does not include the development or improvement of user profiles and identifiers.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type, or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times a video or an article is presented to you).
With your acceptance, your precise location (within a radius of less than 500 metres) may be used in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
With your acceptance, certain characteristics specific to your device might be requested and used to distinguish it from other devices (such as the installed fonts or plugins, the resolution of your screen) in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Your data can be used to monitor for and prevent unusual and possibly fraudulent activity (for example, regarding advertising, ad clicks by bots), and ensure systems and processes work properly and securely. It can also be used to correct any problems you, the publisher or the advertiser may encounter in the delivery of content and ads and in your interaction with them.
Certain information (like an IP address or device capabilities) is used to ensure the technical compatibility of the content or advertising, and to facilitate the transmission of the content or ad to your device.
Information about your activity on this service may be matched and combined with other information relating to you and originating from various sources (for instance your activity on a separate online service, your use of a loyalty card in-store, or your answers to a survey), in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
In support of the purposes explained in this notice, your device might be considered as likely linked to other devices that belong to you or your household (for instance because you are logged in to the same service on both your phone and your computer, or because you may use the same Internet connection on both devices).
Your device might be distinguished from other devices based on information it automatically sends when accessing the Internet (for instance, the IP address of your Internet connection or the type of browser you are using) in support of the purposes exposed in this notice.
The choices you make regarding the purposes and entities listed in this notice are saved and made available to those entities in the form of digital signals (such as a string of characters). This is necessary in order to enable both this service and those entities to respect such choices.
have your say