« Hmmmm... | Main | Radio special: Billy Graham on marriage »

Childless Fathers and Fatherless Children

On Friday's episode of The Oprah Winfrey Show, several young women were introduced as products of the sperm donation industry. In fact, one of the young women said of herself that that is exactly what she is--a product--emphasizing the dehumanizing nature of the industry. Two sperm fathers were also present during the show, there to discuss the many children they are starting to become aware of and have relationships with.

What struck me about this program is how the natural implications of the industry were viewed so casually, the emptiness of the children created by what our culture has said is a valid and even ideal family model--single parent and child. Regrets were not communicated by the mothers or donors of these young people, but the offspring certainly felt cheated out of a part of their own identity.

Is it really any surprise that the children of anonymous sperm "donors" are forced to address the decisions made for them by their mother and sperm father? We're not surprised--we've always understood the implications associated with reproductive technologies that make the marital union unnecessary. And Oprah and her guests didn't seem surprised--they too have understood the implications, but they are not looking for a corrective for the industry, they just want to change the rules of the game. In hindsight, each of us sees and knows that fatherless children lack a substantive piece of their life. And now we have to contend with the issue of childless fathers, those who regret the literally hundreds of donations many of them made at sperm banks and wonder where their children are.

It was also said on the program that up to 30,000 children a year are born by this manner of conception. As a society we've been terribly worried for our children with deadbeat dads, now our society is electing to make this paradox the norm--fatherless children and childless fathers.

Comments

Sarah,

I agree. Out of the sterility of the laboratory, science can produce offspring for us, certainly a truncated version of what conception should be. I'm uneasy, however, because many of the same arguments, or related ones, I see authors like Nancy DeMoss using to condemn all contraception. I don't have the book here, but in DeMoss's book, "Lies Women Believe . . ," she more than implies that belief in contraception is precursor to belief in abortive rights. And I just don't see that logical leap.

Posted by: Ruthie at February 11, 2008 10:22 AM

Ruthie, thanks for your comment... I will check out NLDemoss and reflect on that issue in a future post. :)

Posted by: sarah flashing at February 11, 2008 6:36 PM

WOW. More evidence of the importance of the Father's role. we just can't ignore it. I think this is something that we just haven't looked into enough. I was the "product" of a divorce situation and I know that negatively impacted my life and identity- the loss of "father" must truly be incalculable for those where all points of relationship get erased, except for the science....

Somewhere in here is an opportunity to preach the gospel: a Heavenly Father whose creative hand was not edited out- whose imprint is in the DNA- cares about your existence and loves you. Our capacity fo evil cannot obliterate God's capacity for good. I believe that.

Posted by: Ilona at February 12, 2008 1:56 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?






If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.

About

Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.