Anna T's Take on righteous conception

[slh12280]

I just had no words from this excerpt from Anna T's blog: "Children created by a sperm donation will never know any of that. It's worse than being an orphan, or the child of divorced parents." That just struck me as so wrong on so many levels. If the child conceived was wanted and well taken care of then I don't see that as being worse than being an orphan. Anyone else's take on this?

[ViolaSebastian]

A child with a heavily invested and loving, caring mother able to care for him or her will fair much better than a child with two present but detached and emotionally distant parents. That's just common sense.

I also take exception to the fact that she says it's 'worse than being the child of divorced parents.' I'm a child of divorced parents, and I can tell you right here and now that my life improved tremendously when my parents divorced and I was out of that dysfunctional dynamic. I did MUCH better as a child of divorce than I did as a child of a married couple.

I wonder what her take on a child conceived through sexual assault would be. I mean the child wouldn't know his/her father (except in some shameful instances where the rapist gets visitation... :? ). I imagine she thinks the child should be given up for adoption to a married (Christian) couple.

[JBsHairspray]

I think the "worse than orphans, divorced parents" is a load of crap.

I did read an article once though where several, now adults, children conceived through anonymous donor sperm were interviewed.

While they all agreed they were loved, wanted and had wonderful childhoods each of them spoke about having an identity crisis in their adult lives. They were all aware that their family heritage wasn't "theirs" in so much as they knew nothing about the donor and considered him their true biological lineage. They expressed a desire to know what he was like and if they had similarities, traits, likes and dislikes that mirrored his. They also wondered about his family and what other relatives they had. I remember one guy saying "like what if I unknowingly marry my sister?"

[2xx1xy1JD]

Anna T's not Christian. She just spends a lot of time in the fundie blogosphere, so she picks up some Christian fundie attitudes and then gets confused and disturbed when they don't match up with her own religious community.

I found this article on the issue of religious single Jewish women intentionally conceiving children, and the rabbinic response. It's quite interesting:

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340 ... 80,00.html

I will say that if someone is going to intentionally create a child who will have only one parent, they do need to prepare even more to ensure that they will have all the support that they need. I know my sister had a blunt conversation with her SIL (who was a good friend even before she married her brother), and told her that they would not support her doing this. They know that she loves children and would be an excellent mother IF she stayed healthy, but she struggles with a chronic health issue and often needs to be hospitalized.

The idea of rabbis approving the idea of an older single woman using a gay man as a known sperm donor was intriguing.

[Hane]

She reminds me of the certified nutjob biology teacher I had in high school back in 1968, when the concept of the "test-tube baby" was first being discussed. (He was a certifiable whackjob Catholic who told us in class about a vivid dream he had in which he was visited by Jesus. He self-published a book about it, and was seen sitting in a local drugstore with a stack of copies, hoping to sell them. Apparently he got few or no takers.)

He said that we'd only know if such babies had souls depending on, after they were born and were old enough to talk, their answer to the question, "Is there a God?" I just sat there and thought, "The kid would be a flesh-and-blood human being raised by parents, so wouldn't s/he adopt or at least be affected by their religious attitudes?" But I didn't say anything, because we all knew this guy was half a dozen sandwiches short of a picnic basket.

[Four is Enough]

I think the "worse than orphans, divorced parents" is a load of crap.

I did read an article once though where several, now adults, children conceived through anonymous donor sperm were interviewed.

While they all agreed they were loved, wanted and had wonderful childhoods each of them spoke about having an identity crisis in their adult lives. They were all aware that their family heritage wasn't "theirs" in so much as they knew nothing about the donor and considered him their true biological lineage. They expressed a desire to know what he was like and if they had similarities, traits, likes and dislikes that mirrored his. They also wondered about his family and what other relatives they had. I remember one guy saying "like what if I unknowingly marry my sister?"

Slightly different: our Four are all adopted from three different families. All are "open" adoptions, and the children have known their birth families from the beginning. They have each expressed disconnect between us as their parents and their "real" parents, or had issues with knowing who to love as smaller children. Each has also said that they feel "thrown away" or "rejected" by their birth parents. So there is angst to every type of "differently assembled" family members. I suppose Anna T would have something to say about the courageous plans our birth families made in planning for adoption, but the fact of their conceptions (out of wedlock) wouldn't be righteous.

[2xx1xy1JD]

I don't agree with her post, but let's be clear on what the issue is for her.

In Judaism, using artificial insemination is not automatically considered to be wrong. The issue is usually whether there are concerns about increasing the risk of accidental incest, or whether a married woman can use a sperm donor who is not her husband (and there are technical ways around these issues, but that's a much longer discussion). Using technology itself is not considered to be a problem.

Jewish law also considers making babies to be a good thing, in general. It's considered to be a requirement for men, and something that some women may desperately long for.

Anna's argument is that a single woman may really long for a baby, but that doesn't mean that rabbis should say that it's totally fine for her to go and make one. Her objection is that you are intentionally creating a fatherless child, and she thinks that this is a bad thing because fathers are important.

She's not talking about whether married couples should use IVF, or babies conceived from rape, or accidental conceptions.

I think that a child of a single woman who used donor sperm wouldn't have the trauma associated with having a parent die, and also wouldn't have the trauma associated with divorce and/or ongoing conflict between parents. The children who are intentionally created are also more likely to have a parent who is prepared to be a parent and to feel good about being a parent. OTOH, I do still see 2 parents as the ideal situation. I know fathers who are now raising their children because the mothers passed away. I know that my life is easier because my husband is an actively involved father, and that the kids benefit.

[meee]

Oh for crying out loud.

Let me start (as I do in just about every post because I'm mostly a lurker) by saying that I am an Orthodox Jew (a real one, not one who's been influenced by Christian fundie ideals). First of all, for Anna to have the chutzpah (gall?) to have anything to say about women who can't have children really really irks me. Like Anna, I got married at 22. And here I am, 26 and no babies in sight. She just needs to shut up.

Obviously mine is a different issue from single women who also desperately want babies. And, I admit, I'm surprised that a Modern Orthodox rabbi would permit single women to use sperm donors. I've only ever heard of them giving advice to freeze their eggs. But... ugh. I feel like for someone who DOES claim to be Modern Orthodox (right? I feel like someone here has said that. I don't actually follow her blog.) to openly write about how these rabbis are wrong is just not okay. It strikes me as similar to a lot of these other fundies who seem to think that they (or their headship, or their family, etc.) and nobody else knows the right way. There's no way Anna is more learned than these rabbis.

I hope that made sense!

[slh12280]

I don't agree with her post, but let's be clear on what the issue is for her.

In Judaism, using artificial insemination is not automatically considered to be wrong. The issue is usually whether there are concerns about increasing the risk of accidental incest, or whether a married woman can use a sperm donor who is not her husband (and there are technical ways around these issues, but that's a much longer discussion). Using technology itself is not considered to be a problem.

Jewish law also considers making babies to be a good thing, in general. It's considered to be a requirement for men, and something that some women may desperately long for.

Anna's argument is that a single woman may really long for a baby, but that doesn't mean that rabbis should say that it's totally fine for her to go and make one. Her objection is that you are intentionally creating a fatherless child, and she thinks that this is a bad thing because fathers are important.

She's not talking about whether married couples should use IVF, or babies conceived from rape, or accidental conceptions.

I think that a child of a single woman who used donor sperm wouldn't have the trauma associated with having a parent die, and also wouldn't have the trauma associated with divorce and/or ongoing conflict between parents. The children who are intentionally created are also more likely to have a parent who is prepared to be a parent and to feel good about being a parent. OTOH, I do still see 2 parents as the ideal situation. I know fathers who are now raising their children because the mothers passed away. I know that my life is easier because my husband is an actively involved father, and that the kids benefit.

I totally agree with your take on a 2 parent household being ideal. That is one of my conservative ideas that has stuck around and pretty sure if I never got married then I wouldn't have children. I realize that marriage does not nearly solve every issue but I can see both your point and her point. I guess I just had issues with wording.