After some predictable ideological throat-clearing, Mindy Jacobs of the Calgary Sun gives her readers a pretty decent wrap-up of our report.
Nevertheless, the concerns expressed by the donor kids surveyed reflect genuine anxiety over how they are supposed to define themselves.
One woman described her ancestral home as “a glass sample jar.” Another said the thought of being conceived from a one-night stand was more appealing than being conceived through donor insemination because her mother never met her dad.
Of the donor kids surveyed, 70% agreed that they wonder what their sperm donors’ families are like and two-thirds agreed that “My sperm donor is half of who I am.”
More, here.
Categories: My Daddy's Name is Donor
I wasn’t thrilled with this article for the same reasons this person wrote in response (http://www.winnipegsun.com/comment/letters/2010/06/02/14234801.html):
“Rights of the children
Re: ‘Who’s your daddy? Testing the test tube,’ June 1.
I appreciated Mindelle Jacobs report on the study about the negative social and psychological consequences of donor conception.
I was disappointed, however, that she didn’t explicitly admit the obvious: Donor conception ignores the interests and rights of children. Is it not common sense that every child has a right to know the two human beings who gave him or her life? We already know children with absent fathers are much more likely to have social and psychological issues. Isn’t donor conception just the institutionalization of such absenteeism? Jacobs seems more worried about the “right-wing stance” of the institute than the interests and rights of children.
David Graham”