After finding out that my parents used a sperm donor to conceive me, the first place I went to on the Internet to find support was a bulletin board of moms that I frequented. It didn’t occur to me to use Google to find other donor conceived people. I just went to the sites I always went to. I posted a message asking if anyone was conceived with a sperm donor.
My very first reply was from a lady whose sister had used a sperm donor, and the little girl was about 3. This lady told me that I needed to write my parents a thank you note for raising me. She was very hostile and rude about it.
I don’t think I was mad about it so much as I was hurt. I needed someone to throw me a lifeline to pull me out of the depth of despair that was taking over my life, and she threw me a ton of bricks to sink me even deeper.
Since then, I’ve had a few responses that I assume were not well thought-out before they came out of the person’s mouth. I’ve been told that sperm donation is like giving blood, and that it’s like adoption. A couple of people have asked if I still think of my (social) dad as Dad.Â
So I’d like to clear up a few* misconceived ideas about donor conception. Please note that feelings about donor conception vary greatly from person to person. Sometimes, feelings vary greatly within just one person; they may be fine with it one day, and angry about it the next day.Â
I enlisted the help of several donor conceived people who contributed some of the misconceptions that they’ve heard from people. My thanks to you.
Misconception #1: “My Daddy’s Name is Donor.”  The term “donor conceived” is actually an inaccurate term for most of us. Our fathers (or mothers in the case of egg donations) never “donated” gametes, but were paid for their services. A donation is what is given out of the generosity of heart, but money exchanged for goods is called a transaction. “Transaction conceived” doesn’t really have a nice ring to it, though, does it?
Misconception #2: The donor is not a parent. Once I got over the initial shock of this new reality, I realized that there is a man out there who is my biological father. Not just a “nice man” who helped create me, but an actual father; a man with whom I have a real substantial connection. Please realize that donors are not like McDonald’s where you can go and pick up a Dr. Pepper. I can buy a Dr. Pepper from McDonald’s close to home or three states away and it will be pretty much the same. I can even go to Wendy’s and get the exact same Dr. Pepper as McDonald’s. Â
A man and his sperm are not like a restaurant and its soft drinks. No man is exactly like another man, and his sperm is not exactly the same as another man’s sperm. The DNA that my father contributed to my creation cannot be duplicated by anyone else (unless he has an identical twin). My father’s sperm is uniquely his. I, Stephanie, exist because his sperm containing his unique DNA fertilized my mother’s egg with her unique DNA. He helped create me. He isn’t my Dad, but he is my father.
Misconception #3: Agreeing to parent another man’s child makes a man a Dad. This may or may not be true, depending on the man. Not all donor conceived people have good relationships with their social fathers. I am so blessed that I have a fantastic Dad who raised me. But many social fathers never really become “Daddy” to the child who was conceived with another man’s sperm. I think it takes a really special man to become a Dad (and by the name Dad, I’m implying that there is a special affectionate relationship to the child and he’s not just an authority figure) whether it is through donation, adoption, step-parenting, or any other situation in which a man finds himself parenting.
Misconception #4: Really wanting a child makes you a good parent. Even when a child is “really wanted,” it doesn’t guarantee that “really wanted” translates into good parenthood any more than getting pregnant by surprise makes a person a good parent. Â
As for a person being told that they were “really wanted,” one woman put it this way: “Well actually, NO! The baby my parents REALLY wanted was the one they could never have. I was just their second best option.”
Misconception #5: Using a donor is a cure to infertility. A cure to infertility is getting a couple pregnant using their own gametes when pregnancy wasn’t happening previous to the cure. Using a donor doesn’t make a couple fertile – it simply gets the woman pregnant using another man’s sperm.  The husband/partner is still infertile.
Misconception #6: Every DC person wants a relationship with their non-present biological parent. Not every donor conceived person wants to find their biological father. Not everyone wants him to stay anonymous, either. People may bounce back and forth between both emotions over time. Some may want varying degrees of “knowing” – anywhere from a full-blown relationship to just seeing a picture and knowing a name. Others may just want a medical history. It’s not a safe assumption to think you know how a person feels about having knowledge about their biological parent.  They themselves may not know what exactly they want.
Misconception #7: Donating sperm/eggs is like donating blood.  Blood sustains life that already exists. Sperm/eggs are necessary to create life. I see no comparison at all.Â
Misconception #8: My child doesn’t need their biological parent. I/We are all they need. I’ve read it in the comments, both here and other places; couples feel that their love will fill all of the spaces in the child’s heart. I do want to say this as gently, but clearly as possible, because I’m aware that the love that a parent has for a child is so incredibly important. You are important to the child, whether you are the biological parent or not. If you are there in the child’s life, and you play the role of a loving parent, your child does need your love. No child can have too much love. But please understand that a child who grows up wanting to know who their biological parent is probably isn’t rejecting your love. There is just a need in many of us to know who they came from. You can never fill that hole in their heart. It isn’t because you aren’t a good enough parent. It’s because the hole is in the shape of the missing biological parent, and no matter how hard you try, you won’t fit into that shape any more than a square is going to fit into a round hole.
Misconception #9: Looking for my biological father means that I don’t love the man who raised me. False. The man who raised me is my Dad and always will be. Searching for my biological father in no way negates my love for my Dad. I have five children and I love all of them with my whole heart. I didn’t run out of love after the first one. That’s the great thing about love – loving one person doesn’t mean that there is no love left for anyone else. I love my Dad. I am interested in finding my father. These realities don’t cancel each other out. They coexist.
Misconception #10: Donor conception is just like adoption. Adoption happens when a child cannot be raised by his/her family for whatever reason. The parents are deceased or unfit or unavailable to take care of their child (or in some cases, forced to give up their child). The child isn’t generally created with the purpose of giving them away to another family.
Donor conception, on the other hand, is purposefully endeavoring to create a child who will never know or be with half of their biological family. The missing family will either be replaced by the mother’s partner’s family, or completely discarded all together (as in the case of single parents). Before the child is even created, half of the family tie is severed.Â
Misconception #11: All donor conceived people have a victim mentality. “Victim” is defined as “one that is acted on and usually adversely affected by a force or agent.” I would say that I have absolutely been adversely affected by a force or agent. I know that there are others who would say the same thing. But a victim mentality? No. I see men and women who are working hard to change laws around the world to protect those who haven’t yet been conceived in this manner from the pain that we endure. The blogs and articles I’ve read are about people who are trying to affect change within culture by making society aware of this situation. Â
(*There are SO MANY MORE misconceptions regarding donor conception – Tangled Webs UK is a great resource to read more about it. Check it out here and here.)
Categories: My Daddy's Name is Donor, Reproductive Technologies
Misconception #12: There is some sort of right to do this. It was illegal and ruled to be adultery when it was first done, and then was done secretly under the veil of marital privacy, and then somehow became an open commercial business under the cloak of reproductive rights, but it never got over that first hurdle of adultery, or at least of not being a right. There is no right to intentionally create a person, especially outside of marriage. It’s completely unnecessary, environmentally damaging and economically unsustainable, and it damages human dignity and equality.
I would just like to add to Misconception #8:
This is what my advocacy boils down to: “No child can have too much love.” Exactly!!!!
Which is why I wanted to elaborate on: “There is just a need in many of us to know who they came from.”
It’s a very complex emotional and social issue (obviously) and for many “donor” conceived, it is easy to to advocate for identity release – knowing who we come from. BUT, finding out the name of a person who is cold and distant – especially if the offspring is sensitive, can potentially be very emotionally harmful. By no means am I suggesting that identity release should be avoided because of this but the emotional and social complexities is one of the primary reasons why I do not support this practice. I this is done in a way that is open w/social parents/family and bio-fathers (mothers) and bio-family being embracing and loving of each other – then I actually think this could be a very positive family structure. Unfortunately, there are all kinds of reasons why this won’t happen most of the time….hence my fall back – I really don’t support the practice – especially when done commercially.
This blog certainly has some eloquent writers!
Very powerful, Stephanie.
You are telling your story. That is not wallowing in victimhood. It’s creating awareness. Being an advocate for yourself and others, especially those who can not speak for themselves (the potential children of DC) is a noble endeavor.
A related topic is children of infidelity or prior relationships and even rape. How important is it for people to feel certain that their mother and father are actually their biological parents and their siblings all actually their full siblings? It is usually enough for everyone to believe that, and it’s never more than black humor for anyone to suggest otherwise. But these days there are home DNA kits to verify that your child is really your child, or maybe your father your father (they only need a hair). I can understand it in the case of men wanting to be sure their children are really theirs, but it seems wrong for kids to make sure their parents are really theirs. Would anyone do that?
“I can understand it in the case of men wanting to be sure their children are really theirs, but it seems wrong for kids to make sure their parents are really theirs. Would anyone do that?”
Why on earth would you think it was okay for a parent to want to know the truth but not the child-adult/offspring? The intentions involved and what they do with the information (the truth) is a completely separate issue.
I’ve never heard of a child testing to make sure their parent was their biological parent, that’s all. Have you heard of that?
Yes. But only because I’ve been involved in the “donor conception” community. If I wasn’t, I’m 99.99999% sure I wouldn’t have because it’s not a subject that would come up in casual conversation.
Right, and no one would want to know that the parents they think are their parents are not their biological parents. No one would want to mess up their family by discovering that their mom had an affair or wasn’t their birth mother or whatever. If everything is hunkydory, no one would want to discover any hankypanky. And yet people do wonder sometimes, because their nose isn’t their mother’s or father’s nose, their parents sometimes make strange comments that they pretend not to hear, neighbors might make insinuations that they refuse to listen to. But that wonder probably never rises to action, even though DNA tests are available, because no one wants to find out something like that.
For many people, it is necessary to know the truth….no matter how terrible that disclosure might be.
I had to do so at the age of 16. Living with a distortion of the truth concerning one’s identity is enough to drive some to madness.
Undoubtedly there are many DC persons who, unaware of their DC status, are bewildered by discrepancies in their lives; but are unable to begin to confront the reasons why it is so. This is how it has been in adoption also.
The world needs to prepare itself for the increasing numbers of DC persons who (through traditional/”ova donor”surrogacy; ova/embryo/sperm “donation”) will be seriously outraged when they comprehend the manner of their conception…and its consequences in their lives.
Stephanie, thanks for a great collection of misconceptions and observations. Here are some of my thoughts:
> Misconception #1: “My Daddy’s Name is Donor.” The term “donor conceived” is actually an inaccurate term for most of us. Our fathers (or mothers in the case of egg donations) never “donated” gametes, but were paid for their services….
On the word “donor”: I don’t know our “donor” personally, but we have a letter from her in which she described in detail why she was doing this: she told us that if she were in a situation where she needed help having children, she hoped someone would do this for her. Yes, she was paid. Was that the only reason she did it? Based on what I know, I don’t think so. Would she have done it if she weren’t being paid? I have to confess that I doubt it. In any event, the prospect of being paid was probably how she found out about it. But even so, it seems wildly incomplete to lump all donors together as doing it just “for the money.”
> Misconception #4: Really wanting a child makes you a good parent. Even when a child is “really wanted,” it doesn’t guarantee that “really wanted” translates into good parenthood any more than getting pregnant by surprise makes a person a good parent.
This sentence doesn’t make sense to me. When a woman gets pregnant by surprise, it seems that often it wasn’t the ideal time or situation, and one might imagine the scenario could translate into less than enthusiastic parenting, sort of the opposite of what you’re saying.
> As for a person being told that they were “really wanted,” one woman put it this way: “Well actually, NO! The baby my parents REALLY wanted was the one they could never have. I was just their second best option.”
In our experiences with IVF and fertility clinics, one of the key differences between heterosexual couples or singles using donation and gay couples using donation that became apparent to us is this: frequently, the experience of heterosexuals using donation includes the presence of sadness and loss: I was supposed to be able to do this naturally, but (for whatever reason) I can’t. What else can I do? For the gay couples that I know, the experience of using donation is generally one of joy, and shame is usually not present.
> Misconception #8: My child doesn’t need their biological parent. I/We are all they need. I’ve read it in the comments, both here and other places; couples feel that their love will fill all of the spaces in the child’s heart. I do want to say this as gently, but clearly as possible, because I’m aware that the love that a parent has for a child is so incredibly important. You are important to the child, whether you are the biological parent or not. If you are there in the child’s life, and you play the role of a loving parent, your child does need your love. No child can have too much love. But please understand that a child who grows up wanting to know who their biological parent is probably isn’t rejecting your love….
I recognize that no matter how carefully we lay out the truth to our kids over the coming years, that we cannot know what they will feel about their origins. Our responsibility is to be honest and to be as aware as we can of their feelings about it, and empathetic as a result. Slowly, we will turn from their responding to our initiatives about that knowledge to our responding to their initiatives about it.
> Misconception #11: All donor conceived people have a victim mentality….
I’ve seen both. I see incredible individuals working to understand their place in a world that is not what they once thought it was, and trying to figure out how to make it better. At times, I have also seen people for whom the complete absence of a biological parent, in its full unknowingness, provides a perfect crystalline resting spot for sharp existential pain. Our minds project that people who are absent and unknown are everything we need them to be. I recognize this, because I have experienced it myself and done it myself. It is not a victim mentality, but it can easily become one. It can become an excuse to not face the real, current issues in one’s life.
It’s just that there is a delicate balance between the awareness and experience of loss and the opportunities for understanding that loss rudely offers, opportunities that are unavailable any other way.
John, I believe that I’ve heard of people who were absolutely certain that they were unrelated to one or both of their presumptive parents. The way I’ve heard them describe their situation is similar to what Polly mentions above. There’s something about not knowing that’s gnawing at them, pushing them to know the truth, no matter what.
Ralph, I think the “donor-conceived” are well aware that the “donor” part of that term is a euphemism. They didn’t come up with that euphemism, and from what I can tell, many of them would be happy to replace the term.
Your observation about the differences between hetero couples and same-sex couples in fertility clinics is an interesting one that we ought to keep in mind when looking at this issue.
Ralph:
“I don’t know our “donor” personally, but we have a letter from her in which she described in detail why she was doing this: she told us that if she were in a situation where she needed help having children, she hoped someone would do this for her.”
As a former egg donor.. It is sooooo easy to manipulate your responses and construct a script for parents and agents to make yourself look good on paper. Do you think intended parents would buy a girl’s eggs if she told them that she really needs the money so she can get the boob job she’s always wanted?
Your letter may be a facade of reassurance as to her altruism, but that has nothing to do with the honest merit of her motivations to sell.
but sometimes people need the lie, I don’t blame you.
Any comment on my Misconception #12 (first comment above)? I think it is perhaps the biggest, most basic misconception, and most urgently in need of correction from experts and authorities like DB and EM and MG.
Alana: One of the stories in your most recent post talked about “Occam’s Razor,” and how the people involved in the story ignored the aphorism “the simplest explanation for something is usually the best.” It’s funny then to approach the question of an egg donor’s story from the point of view of assuming that the less simple of two explanations is true: that she’s lying about her motivations.
People lie, undeniably. But to live one’s life assuming the worst from people that way is a fast path to a very solitary emotional world.
Mostly though, it’s the illogical leap from “it’s possible that she’s lying” to “I don’t blame you for needing the lie,” that, combined with the bitterness inside your comment, leads me to think that this might be more about your needing to believe that she’s lying rather than any presumption on our part about it.
Hi Ralph!
Regarding “donors” – I didn’t mean to insinuate that donors donate “just for the money” (though I think that’s probably the main reason – altruism, while it might exist probably isn’t the first motivation) my point is that a donation is a gift. There are very few “donors” who actually GAVE their sperm/eggs away compared to the number who sold their sperm or eggs. Why they sold them isn’t the issue – the point is, they did *sell* them.
#4 – good parenting…I think we are saying the same thing? Whether the child is planned or a surprise, neither situation defines how the adult will parent.
I hear what you are saying about hetero couples using donors bc of their loss vs homo couples who know they will never have a child together. Point taking. This particular quote was from a woman who was born to a hetero couple.
You said, “Our responsibility is to be honest and to be as aware as we can of their feelings about it, and empathetic as a result.” YES! PLEASE be empathtic and helpful and supportive and let them be mad at you if they need to. I’m so glad you get that!! But I have to ask – why go this route if you know there is a possibility this will happen? Can I be completely nosy and ask if you were aware of DC people’s POV before doing the donor route? You don’t actually have to answer that; I think I’m asking it rhetorically for those who haven’t yet used a donor who might be reading this.
Stephanie: Thanks for you post.
First, an aside: Mmmm, Dr Pepper!
Karen can tell you that I have a bee in my bonnet about the Dad/Father dichotomy. In our species, at any rate, “father” has a technical, genetic definition but is also a title of social respect. The technical term is the technical term, but I feel that “Dad” lacks some due respect even if it teems with love. There is more to the status of father than love or genetics. Still, let me ask this: Have you asked your Dad which title he would like? Does it matter to you what his answer is? Does it matter to him? Do you call him both? I’m asking the wrong question? (my money is on the last one)
On a slightly more hopeless note, according to the prevailing ideology herein, there is a father-shaped hole in the DC heart that Dads cannot fill and there is a biological-child-shaped hole in a recipient parents’ heart that the DC cannot not fill. When the parents respond “We love you”, the reply is that it is not enough. The response to recipient parent’s feelings is “We love you”…. BUT the conclusion must be that will not be enough either. It is a good thing I think there is value to trying even in the face of certain defeat.
Alana: Put on your egg donor cap. Your story about why you wanted the money boils down to your choice to be a musician rather than an advertiser or something more mundane. That sounds kinda cool and bohemian and brave on one level, but gets less so if you think some more and from your daughter’s perspective. This isn’t a sleight against musicianship; you could have done it to finance an operation to save the life of a widowed orphan and her 3 kids and it might still seem to be less than a slam dunk from your daughter’s perspective. Anyway, I know you know this, but I thought it was worth saying.
Let’s say the answer is something most people would agree was venal like “I needed money for a boob job” OK, soooo… now what? Can’t unscramble an egg regardless of why it got scrambled in the first place. The measure of a person is what they do next. Gonna make an omelet? Throw the mess it in the compost? Avoid cleaning it up because it’s too icky? What’s it gonna be? I am less convinced that I can learn anything useful about my kid’s genetic mother by with hashing out exactly why she did it than I can by seeing what she will do about it now that it is done.
John,
I wasn’t aware that in the past, DC was “illegal and ruled to be adultery.” That’s interesting. I do remember reading that the Catholic Church regards it as adultery.
Since I’m not Catholic, I guess I have a bit of liberty to think differently, though I can see how they reach that conclusion. Because there is no physical relationship (most of the time, but I did read an article about a man who offered to do it the old fashioned way – ewww!!) I’m not sure that I would put it on par with sexual adultery, though that means I’m splitting hairs about defining “adultery” and I’m pretty sure that I don’t have the authority to do that.
When you boil it down, a wife having a baby by someone other than her husband certainly sounds like adultery, but something in me makes me hesitate to use that word, so I generally don’t.
I wrote about this here:
Ha. leave it to me to mess up a link…
http://donorchild.blogspot.com/2010/02/is-use-of-donor-gametes-biblically.html
Hernan, maybe I should put your bee in my bonnet, too, because I think it really sucks that there has to be a dichotomy in the first place. I can’t speak to what others call their social father, but I can tell you that I don’t use that term because while it might be accurate, it conveys no affection or love the way “Dad” does, at least when I use it. Unfortunately, I don’t talk to my Dad about this much because he has Parkinson’s. I have reassured him, though, that he is still my Dad and always will be. I’ve told him that I am looking for my donor (I can’t bear the thought of saying the word “father” to him in his precarious state) but I don’t know if he remembers that I’ve told him that bit of information. I actually got to tell him twice that I was pregnant with the last baby because he didn’t remember me telling him the first time!
So no, I haven’t asked him. But I’ve always called him “Dad” so there is no need to change that. I use “father” for my bio-father so when I’m in conversation, I don’t have to use “biological father” over and again. I also use it because that’s what he is.
Yes, it would matter to me if my Dad didn’t like my vocabulary. He probably wouldn’t appreciate me using the word “sucks” up there at the beginning of this post. But this is simply one of those things that just is.
“On a slightly more hopeless note, according to the prevailing ideology herein, there is a father-shaped hole in the DC heart that Dads cannot fill and there is a biological-child-shaped hole in a recipient parents’ heart that the DC cannot not fill. When the parents respond “We love you”, the reply is that it is not enough. The response to recipient parent’s feelings is “We love you”…. BUT the conclusion must be that will not be enough either.”
Well here is the subjectivity of this whole mess. I don’t think my parents considered me a consolation prize. They certainly NEVER acted in such a manner. I filled the void of their missing child. But then they got *their* child when I was 5, and were pretty surprised after 19 years of marriage he finally got her pregnant! But my story isn’t everyone else’s story. Some parents don’t seem to be satisfied with anyone less than *their* child.
But I think that it’s two different situations, too. The parents made a choice to have a child any way they could. They did have options. They could have stayed childless or adopted or fostered or they could have been an awesome aunt and uncle. But they made their choice and imposed their choice on their child. The child didn’t have a choice. They were born into the situation where they didn’t have the option to chose one man over the other.
I do feel that biological-father-shaped hole in my life, but it isn’t because my Dad wasn’t good enough. He was and still is! But the fact is, there is a man who fathered me and he isn’t in my life. He’s MIA. And it stinks.
One more thought…perhaps this is a homo vs hetero situation again regarding the different shapes of holes we have in our hearts. Gay/lesbian couples KNOW from the beginning that one of them isn’t going to be the biological mom/dad so there is no “loss” to begin with, just like Ralph said earlier.
I dunno. What do you think? I could see where there would still be loss if one of them wanted to be the bio-parent and didn’t get to be.
I have heard one gay man say he experienced his homosexuality as a mild disability and mainly because it meant he could not have children. I believe this is how he put it tho I don’t recall the exact language. And this is just one person.
Hernan,
My dad is no longer alive for me to ask. I don’t think I could have ever spoken out about this issue if he was though, because I would never want to hurt his feelings. The simplest way for me to explain this is, my father can’t replace my dad and my dad can’t replace my father. They both matter to me. There is no disrespect involved in that statement towards either of these very important men. I completely agree with Stephanie’s response to you regarding this question.
Karen and Stephanie, thanks. Really. Thank you for your answers.
What the “donor” gives-up is more than mere gametes, but the pre-emptive relinquishment of parental status for his (or her) child(ren).
And wrapped up in that package is the hole that is etched into the heart of the yet-to-be-concieved child.
There are other things given up by others, too, such as the siblings who are discarded, destroyed, or otherwise not selected for life.
The process itself is as close to manufacturing human beings as we have yet come. John Howard’s point about what he called same-sex procreation, it seems to me, is that human procreation ought to be as far from human manufacture as we can keep it. And I agree on that point.
There is no such thing as same-sex procreation for human procreation is not one-sexed. However, I can see why John would use that euphemism to get his other points across.
Most of the ART/IVF uses do not include “donor” gametes, but the process still comes very, very close to human manufacture. On top of that, however, are the additional ethical problems with deliberately creating a child for the sake of denying that child his (or her) mother or father. This is not about solving a child’s need but satiating an adult’s neediness.
If I were to add to the list of misconceptions, I’d describe the notion that just because something can be done, it is ethical to do it. And just because it has been done, it is ethical to endorse it after the fact and to continue to allow it to be done in the future.
This one causes real pain — first emotional but sometimes also leading to pain on other levels including physical and pyschological — for all involved. Not just the child; not just the parents who partook of this method of attaining children; and not just the person who pre-emptively relinquished; but also for siblings — half (known or unknown), and for those siblings discarded or left in storage.
When people say that they really wanted a child, I say, that is a very good reason to be more restrictive on these methods. I say that because the desire can distort the whole picture. This goes for the example of the infertile married couple whose sense of loss is heavy; it goes for the example of the lone individual or the one-sexed twosome which is moved by delight rather than loss. The temptation of doing this for the money is also good reason to sustain fences around these methods.
It is not enough that someone really, really, really wants a child. That is a short trip away from commidifying human procreation and commidifying — and objectifying — the human beings involved. Not just the DC child but also the “donors” and, yes, the parents who commission the manufacture of a child. The overall effect is to turn people into objects and that touches all of us — whether or not we are in some way direct participants.
Thanks Chairm!
I’m with you all the way.
Stephanie:
> “But I have to ask – why go this route if you know there is a possibility this will happen? Can I be completely nosy and ask if you were aware of DC people’s POV before doing the donor route? You don’t actually have to answer that; I think I’m asking it rhetorically for those who haven’t yet used a donor who might be reading this.”
Go ahead, be nosy! It’s part of the brilliance of this means of communication.
We wanted to be a part of the entire cycle of life’s beginning, from pre-conception through birth. I don’t think we’re any different than hetero couples in wanting to shepherd our children through the beginning of life. There’s something I need to say clearly: I acknowledge and honor the experiences I’ve read about on this site by DC people. That doesn’t mean I agree with all of their conclusions from them. I don’t believe we’re handicapping our children by bringing them into the world this way. I think that all families have their own quirks and challenges; this just happens to be one part of ours. I hope that doesn’t feel disrespectful to you and others whose experience tells them otherwise. By having our kids grow up knowing the truth about their origins, I believe the likelihood is that their adjustment to that part of their background will be no more difficult, and perhaps less so, than simply adjusting to the fact of having two dads.
About your second question, the answer is that I had only read positive stories of DC people’s POV until I came to this blog, stories that were produced inside the gay family community, and so were unlikely to include any negative portrayals of donor conception. But truly, I had thought of some of these issues myself, alone, and together with my partner, we had gone over some potential concerns and whether that should have an impact on how we chose to start our family. We both grew up in families that were non-traditional (each in different ways). We already understood to some degree the requirements that difference places on parents in how they talk to their kids about how they and their family fit in in the world around them.
Chairm,
Your question whether something is possible, is it ethical…I think that’s a great question, for all of life. Of course, then that brings up the question of whose ethic you are talking about, which brings up relativism, which leaves everyone disagreeing, which is pretty much where we are now.
And I second Polly.
Ralph and Hernan, I appreciate your openness. Even though you two and I don’t see eye to eye on this (and many other issues, I’m sure!!) I very much enjoy hearing what you have to say. This topic of donor conception has given me the opportunity to talk with people that I would ordinarily rarely come into contact with.
But I do hope to some day bring you around to my POV.
Thanks, Polly.
Thanks, Stephanie.
If we were to surrender to moral relativism, then, we’d give up the pursuit of objective truth and abandon the enterprise of making moral and ethical decisions.
Granted, the fertility industry generally has gone that route, tragically.