So on the way home from work this evening I was flipping through the radio channels looking for something to listen to. Hopefully something that was upbeat. I'm doing better today but still a bit anxious. Lots of people talking, you know the trip home with traffic reports etc. So I stop at one station that often has stuff I like and it's
John Tesh on. I don't usually love listening to him. To me he comes across as being too goody goody. Within a few minutes though he had me so mad I swearing at the radio. What was he talking about?
Donor conceived children. He was talking about a study that had been done that showed donor conceived children were twice as likely to get in trouble with the law, abuse drugs and alcohol, be severely depressed and so on. So here he is, someone that a lot of people listen to saying how horrible it is to use anonymous donor sperm or donor eggs and that many donor conceived children have said it would have been better if they were adopted children.
Ok, first of all I don't think that comparing adopted children to donor conceived children is an accurate or fair comparison. Different situations. Yes I have heard the others who have went on various talk shows or whatever and said similar things. My problem with this is that if the parent(s) hadn't used donor gametes it's not like this child would be living an alternate happier life elsewhere with their "real" parents. They simply wouldn't exist. For all the children who were the result of donor gametes it's not like they would have been born exactly as they are to a totally different life with different parents. It took the actual mix of the donor gamete (which likely would have gone to waste if it hadn't went into a cup or a
petri dish) and the egg from the mom or whatever to make them. No other combination would have made them. I can understand being curious about biology but biology isn't everything. Biology isn't an instant and perfect cure for a happy life. Even if it wasn't anonymous wouldn't necessarily get the answers or the relationship that this person craves.
My second problem with this is a problem I have with a lot of "studies". They don't give you the details. The size of the study group, where these people were taken from other than donor conceived. Donor conceived with two parents or just single parents? We the children told about the donor and how were they told. How did their parent(s) feel about it. All factors that can influence how a child feels about something. Was there a control group? What other factors were involved in the study.
Finally what about public opinion. John Tesh made a comment that the donor conceived children "felt like they were freaks of nature." This is because that is what some of society has made it. A single woman or a lesbian couple who is trying to have a baby using donor insemination is a joke, something to laugh at or is pathetic by many. She has to do this because she has no other options for a partner or parent. How many times do you see this addressed in TV or movies as a comedy? In many ways, yes this is how it is perceived. Not as a child that is a perfect gift and a wonderful life to be cherished that has been brought into the world by someone who wants to parent responsibly. No it would be almost better in some peoples eyes if you had just went out to a bar and gotten knocked up one night. If you tell someone often enough that how they came to be wasn't "normal" they may yes believe it. So if these children receive negative reactions for their origins often enough they will begin to see themselves as negative.
Of course the ending to the topic wasn't to encourage people to be more open minded about donor conception but instead to call for an end to anonymous donations.
Can I puke now?
Yes, you have just insured that I will once again make a point to change the radio station every time I hear that man's voice.