Ignorance is bliss ...or is it ?
There is much turmoil in the world of DI these days. Should children born in this way be told of their origins? What are the rights of the Donors and the parent s who raise those kids ? Some believe that ignorance is bliss and choose not to tell while others believe that it is important to disclose that information for medical reasons and yet some ex donors believe that DI should cease because they feel a sense of loss that not only affects them but the children as well. I respect all of these views, I think that they all have their valid points.
Personally my wife and I agreed from the start that our potential donor conceived child should have the right to know how he/she came to be from an early age.
I find it interesting that "the rights of the children" is something mostly discussed and legislated by adults. No family unit is perfect regardless as to how the child was conceived. There are plenty of dysfuntional families out there so to say that a child would be the happiest if not born from DI is simply not true. There are no guaranties in life that a child born in a "normal" way within a family unit will not only love but be grateful to his parents forever.
When I look at my own family. My parents divorced when I was 16. Both my parents have remarried but my mum lives in France while my father lives with me in Australia. My brother who also resides in France has ceased all contacts with our mother (his personal decision), Both my brother and I find that we do not share much in common with our father, and I personally believes that I inherited much more from my mum's side rather than my dad's.
I have decided to remain neutral within our family nucleus and if anything it has taught me what NOT to do with my kids.
That goes to show that there is no direct link between the way in which you were created and your happiness as a child.
Also while there is much talk about Di, what about those thousands of children born out of wedlocks every year?
"Lansac" pointed out that in natural reproduction the child does not know the secrets of his parents. He also estimated that in France, 10 000 children are born by adultery each year and there has been no claim that this should be revealed to the children.
(Lansac J: One father only: donor insemination and CECOS in France. Politics Life Sci 1993)
Personally my wife and I agreed from the start that our potential donor conceived child should have the right to know how he/she came to be from an early age.
I find it interesting that "the rights of the children" is something mostly discussed and legislated by adults. No family unit is perfect regardless as to how the child was conceived. There are plenty of dysfuntional families out there so to say that a child would be the happiest if not born from DI is simply not true. There are no guaranties in life that a child born in a "normal" way within a family unit will not only love but be grateful to his parents forever.
When I look at my own family. My parents divorced when I was 16. Both my parents have remarried but my mum lives in France while my father lives with me in Australia. My brother who also resides in France has ceased all contacts with our mother (his personal decision), Both my brother and I find that we do not share much in common with our father, and I personally believes that I inherited much more from my mum's side rather than my dad's.
I have decided to remain neutral within our family nucleus and if anything it has taught me what NOT to do with my kids.
That goes to show that there is no direct link between the way in which you were created and your happiness as a child.
Also while there is much talk about Di, what about those thousands of children born out of wedlocks every year?
"Lansac" pointed out that in natural reproduction the child does not know the secrets of his parents. He also estimated that in France, 10 000 children are born by adultery each year and there has been no claim that this should be revealed to the children.
(Lansac J: One father only: donor insemination and CECOS in France. Politics Life Sci 1993)
posted by MAX at 8:40 AM
3 Comments:
Citing the incidence of paternity fraud (i.e. conception via adultery) does not have any relevance to the position of the donor-conceived child. The fact remains that donor conception is a reproductive practice mediated by the medical profession which involves the intentional separation of the child from one of its biological parents from the moment of birth.
This is a violation of human rights. The only pertinent similarity with paternity fraud is that, in the vast majority of cases, the child is effectively lied to about its true genetic origins. This is a form of enduring harm and should likewise be regarded as a crime.
The fact also remains that donating sperm or an egg is totally voluntary. Some "donors" in the past did it for the money and that is sad to say the least. However these days donors do not gain financial benefit for such a gesture.
Everyone makes choices in life, some good, some bad but in either case you have to live with the consequences of your actions.
As for "enduring harm" , every child will at some stage in their life have to endure harm not that it is a good thing but unfortunately it is intrinsic to life itself.
You mentioned the word 'crime", so who should be "locked up" ? you ? me ? or members of the medical profession ?
Ultimately, the medical practitioners and infertility clinics are culpable and also the governments which via inadequate legislation or none at all have allowed them to get away with violating the donor conceived persons' rights. People seeking fertility treatment are merely pawns in their game and, of course, reliable sources of ongoing revenue.
Post a Comment
<< Home