A Child's Announcement via a Lawn Sign

How Public is Public

The guest columnist writing the Motherlode column for the NY Times today writes about how open should her family be about their religion in a secular world and conversely how liberal can she be in her religious world. The two worlds colliding when her child comes homes from religious school with a lawn sign that reads Jesus Lives. 

http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/parenting/2014/04/05/jesus-lives-but-should-he-live-in-my-front-yard/?smid=tw-share

In the end she trusts in the faith that her neighbors are tolerant of all views and the knowledge who their family is that no prejudice would ensue. 

Made me think on some levels how some couples decide not to tell their children they are donor conceived. Once the child knows it might as well at times be a sign on their front lawn.  To do so might add a stigma to the couple's lives that one parent could not procreate as easily as all their neighbors or that the child may grow up with that stigma attached much as adoptees sometimes did a bit when I was a child in the 1970s. 

This post is not addressing whether DC should be used due to issues of identity, medical or abandonment that some donor conceived have experienced.  

This post is simply looking at the issue from a perspective of who

Telling or Not Telling is serving. Clearly in the world some parents might be embarrassed for their neighbors to know as opposed to the honesty of sharing the info with the child so they have that knowledge and can process it as they will as they grow up. 

The analogy to the NYT column is not perfect but with the facts of my world it is part of what I saw and how I reacted. 

(As an aside I did recently see a cartoon or something about Jesus being Donor Conceived. But that would be a whole other post to address that analogy).

Post # 572

Debate: One Donor 150 Offspring

In the past week the NY Times ran a piece titled "One Donor 150 Children". That article can be found here.

The TODAY show the next day ran a video segment about the article speaking with Wendy Kramer of the Donor Sibling Registry from her home in Colorado and an in studio guest bio-ethicist. Both woman are moms to donor conceived children.

The ensuing debate has lead to a NY Times on-line debate among ten parties associated with the industry or interested groups. I encourage everyone to read the debate HERE and come back and let me know what you think. I was struck how of all the experts and individuals only one parent was asked for their opinion and that was Wendy Kramer. The doctor who contributes was the doctor that helped my wife and I conceive our kids.

Wendy's op-ed contribution was co-written with Naomi R. Cahn a law professor at George Washington University and the author of “Test Tube Families: Why the Fertility Market Needs Legal Regulation.” Their piece suggested a three prong approach at regulation, (1) required data base and tracking by the industry of donors, births, etc, (2) limnitation on the number of children that can be born from a single donor, and (3) limited disclosure of a donor's identity (i.e. reconsidering the practice of donor anonymity).

I must admit of the debate I have read so far I am amazed how some of the writers can't look beyond the donor industry and insurance company point of view and the truth of the numbers to focus on what is best for the offspring. Yes people will find limitations put before them in their quest to have a family but as a parent I think looking back, if successful, the speed bumps reform will bring will be recognized for the greater benefiit it provides society and the offspring.

It’s Father’s Day, Truck out the Sperm Stories

Last week I received an e-mail from a NY Post reporter looking to see if I could direct her to a local NYC area sperm donor that had a number of offspring resulting from their donations. My first reaction was that she really came to the wrong guy as I am the infertile guy who helped start a Yahoo group where other men like me gather to discuss our not being able to biologically create children. I pointed her to Wendy Kramer of the DSR who pointed the reporter to Todd Whitehurst. The resulting article was titled “Pro Creators” subtitled “Sperm donors dads to dozens”

On the same day the NY Times ran a from page story on their Metro Section titled “Baby Makes Four, and Complications” about a woman, her known sperm donor, his lover and the resulting baby. The Op-Ed page ran an essay titled “A Father’s Day Plea to Sperm Donors” written by an 18 year old man, who was conceived via donor insemination, raised by his single mom, who has never known a father and wonders about the man and where he could be.

Today the NY Times blog Motherlode reacted to both earlier NYT pieces and posted a piece titled “Explaining Sperm Donation to a Preschooler” which elicited many comments, including my own.

It appears that anytime there is a holiday, parent related, we get these stories. I guess I should be happy as it elicits discussion. But part of me finds it disheartening that it takes a gimmick to start a discussion.

2011 Tribeca Film Festival Debuts “Donor Unknown”

In late 2005, the NY Times ran a series of articles by Amy Harmon dealing with donor conception one of which was titled “Hello, I’m Your Sister. Our Father is Donor 150”. My reactions to that article can be found here. In early 2007, Donor 150, Jeffrey Harrison, broke his silence and came forward. Well now the story of that donor and his donor conceived offspring has been made into an indie film titled “Donor Unknown” and premiering here in NYC at the Tribeca Film Festival. An article online by IndieWIRE discusses the film and talks with its director.

I have only watched the two minute trailer which can be found on the film’s official website and would love to see the 78 minute film in person at the TFF but don’t think I will be able to swing that but it appears the film can be screened on line based on the schedule. There is an on-line screening this Monday, April 25^th at 6:00am EST and later in the week on Friday, April 29^th also at 6:00am EST.

The film looks quite interesting and the children are all American teenagers so I expect we will see some genuine reactions regarding their thoughts about half siblings, their donor, and their origins. As the movie is about them and the donor I expect we will very little of their moms and if any of them have social fathers like myself. I would be curious for those views. I will also be curious to down the road to buy a DVD copy so when my kids are bit older they can watch. At 9 and 6 I am guessing they would not yet want to watch. I asked my son to watch the trailer online but he was more interested in what was on the TV instead.

Could My Children Erase Me Legally ?

I read today in the NY Times of an interesting case before the NYS Courts where a woman, Nina Viola Montepagani, is looking to remove the name of her father, Giuseppe Viola, from her birth certificate or at least the name of the man who was married to her mother when she was born (and therefore legally considered her natural father). Sound like a possible donor insemination case? You might think so but it’s not. But could it have implication for families and individuals conceived via donor insemination?

The case in question in summary involves a woman’s desire to amend her birth certificate to name a man, a Dr. Sebastiano Reali, whom in all likelihood is her biological father and whom left a fortune to an Italian university as he had no existing descendants. This is not to say there is not “evidence” to support her claim or to say the woman is pursuing this goal to only gain access to possibly inheriting the aforementioned fortune. It appears she loved dearly the man that raised her as his own and he loved her. But she wants to correct a fact that she always felt was wrong.

The Court if I am reading the decision correctly said there was not enough evidence to support her claim to move her position forward thus denying her request to remove her father’s name. The implications of the case are interesting. It would seem if there would be enough evidence perhaps a “child” could in the future petition the Courts to remove the name of the man listed as their father on their birth certificates. Thus erasing the legal link to their DI Dad. I am sure there is more to the decision that that but in summary at a high level that is the question.

- - -

Matter of Montepagani v New York City Dept. of Health Div. of Vital Records 2011 NY Slip Op 50002(U) [30 Misc 3d 1206(A)] Decided on January 3, 2011 Supreme Court, New York County Stallman, J. Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

Father's Day - Then & Now

It is hard for me to believe that is now three years since I wrote the below words and submitted it as an op-ed piece for the NY Times which they never ran. They were my thoughts then and generally still apply today. My life and the lives of my children have changed due to issues unrelated to donor conception and I now have concerns how they will process everything together. My life as a blogger has changed and dropped off as other issues and day to day concerns consume my life now. But my concerns for my children are still paramount and I love them more than anything.

As an aside last night I spoke by phone with Z's mom for a time about possibly scheduling trips for the kids to see their half siblings. Maybe they will get the chance this Summer but if not then it looks like Z may come East to NYC in October. My kids would love to see Z and also T. Perhaps we can convince T's mom to bring her up in October for a long weekend so all four kids can have some time together.

For those of that you that were not dealing with these issues back in 2007 I present this post again:

With Father's Day on the horizon my thoughts stray to the man whose gift allowed my children to come into being. This man is not the doctor or mid wife that delivered them. This man is their sperm donor. My children were conceived via Donor Insemination.

Without this man's gift, these children would never have come into being and into my and my wife's life. I am occasionally asked if I resent that this man could do what I could not. I can comfortably say I do not. On the contrary I want to thank him.

When I was diagnosed with non-obstructive azoospermia 12 years ago I was told that I should expect to never have children of my own. The fact that my children are not biologically linked to me has never lessened my love for them nor my belief that they are indeed my children. At the same time I am cognizant that there is another man whose role cannot be nor should be minimized.

To me he is and is not simply their donor. For now to my children he is in effect non-existent as they don't fully understand the concept of donor insemination. They have been told of their conception story and that a donor was used but this is still too much for them to truly comprehend as they are both less than six years old. Someday soon this will change and I wonder how that will play out. For now the knowledge of his existence rests with my wife and me and as I see it I have a responsibility to not let the truth of him fade away.

The lives of my children are as much connected to him as they are to me. I do not pretend to argue nurture is greater than nature but rather together play a role in these children's lives. I have his bios, medical, social, and educational. I have a toddler picture of him and a recording of his voice. All of this info is being saved for them as it is part of who they are.

Everyday I see articles addressing infertility and the use of donor conception from the side of the couples going through infertility, women choosing single motherhood, or lesbian or gay couples looking to start families. There are court cases around the country redefining what is family and who has the right to be legally defined as a parent or not. Under New York State law I am considered the legal father to my children. But despite that fact I know that someday my children will wonder about the man that is one half of their genetic make up.

Most heterosexual families of donor conceived children choose to never tell their children of the conception story fearing the child will turn against the social parent or for fear or shame of the perceived stigmas of using another person’s sperm or eggs to create their children. In my opinion these parents do so for their own reasons and not for the benefit of the children who have a right to the truth. I recently contributed an essay to a book series titled “Voices of Donor Conception” and have been increasingly involved in the discussions of these topics on the Internet.

The central issues surrounding donor conception, including donor anonymity, regulation and reform, have been or are being addressed in several countries around the world including Great Britain, Australia, New Zealand and Canada among others. The United States has not yet entered that discussion and currently there are no federal laws directly regulating the sale of gametes [i] nor are there any regulations imposed on the administration of the various cryobanks and clinics that solicit gamete donations and sell these gametes to the public. I am in favor of reforming the practices of this industry but I am not here today for that purpose.

I no longer fear the donor’s shadow but rather acknowledge his presence and if my children ask that his contribution be honored this or on a future Father’s Day I must honor their wishes if I am half the father I believe myself to be to them. So on their behalf I wish him a Happy Father’s Day and I say to him thank you for allowing me to do the same.

NY Times Blog: “Relative Choices”

The subtitle for the NY Times blog “Relative Choices” is “Adoption and the American Family”. As Bill Cordray has been stating for many years a number of issues confronting the donor conceived mirror those addressed by the adoption community. Each day that I read this blog I wish that issues surrounding donor conception were addressed openly in an international forum such as the New York Times. I recommend this blog heartily for anyone with an interest in this area.

I have written or rather tried to write the appropriate party at the New York Times to ask if this blog could be expanded to address donor conception in some manner. I have had no luck so far even determining who that person may be. Even once a week or even two weeks would be a great start. Certainly there are many blogs out whose focus is donor conception and each them is worthy of national attention for the issues they address. But somehow I think if the NY Times can be persuaded to include donor conception to their blog it would be a great step forward in recognizing the issues confronting donor conceived individuals and their families.

I have thought of creating a new blog which would hopefully draw from the wide field of advocates in the donor community where their opinions, stories, and thoughts could be brought together in one place apart from their standard platforms which could be used as a Journal much like the Relative Choices blog. If you think this a worthwhile endeavor and I will pursue it.

NY Times : "Your Gamete, Myself" - Donor Egg Stories

no. 407

"Your Gametes, Myself"
Peggy Orenstein
NY TImes Magazine
July 15, 2007

I just found out about this article and plan to read it tonight and add my comments later.

The article can be linked to through this blog's post title.

NY Times Op Ed re Genetic Engineering Through Donor Conception

no. 389

David Brooks in an Op Ed column titled "The National Pastime" published by the NY Times today, June 15th, quotes a Harris Poll that " 40 percent of Americans would use genetic engineering to upgrade their children mentally and physically". His opening paragraph states:

"At this very moment thousands of people are surfing the Web looking for genetic material so their children will be nothing like me. They are looking through files at sperm bank sites with Jetson-like names such as Xytex, which have become the new eBays for offspring."

The column continues to state that at the current rate "normal" non perfect specimen humans do not stand a chance and that to keep up all of us must follow suit or our children will be left behind.

I submitted a reply that individuals like me did not go the donor route to simply improve our gene pool or our children's chances of attending Dalton here in Manhattan. If anything the normal couple choosing donor conception, at least here in the US where such choices of donor are possible, made such choices as to match our infertile selves as best as possible. If anything I stated that our donor's medical history is a tad worse than my own. [Do my children have a lawsuit against for me for such a decision? Lord I hope not but I digress.]

I am posting the full text of the column on this blog's Annex as it is only available on-line if you subscribe to Times Select. It always seems like articles like this pop up around Mother's Day or Father's Day or is it just me noticing them more around this time of year.

A Reminder That My Sperm Don't Work......

no. 387

"Sleek, Fast and Focused: The Cells That Make Dad Dad"

New York Times

By Natalie Angier
Published: June 12, 2007

Today's NY Times included an article that only reminded me that my sperm did not do what they are designed to do. Granted the article does point out that only 15% of a man's sperm does what it is supposed to so perhaps I should not feel so bad. It is an interesting article but somehow did not add to my overall demeanor or self worth today. The graphic accompanying the article, copied above, had an old vintage text book look to it that was cool.

I was quite amused at the opening two lines of the article:

"We are fast approaching Father’s Day, the festive occasion on which we plague Dad with yet another necktie or collect phone call and just generally strive to remind the big guy of the central verity of paternity — that it’s a lot more fun to become a father than to be one. “I won’t lie to you,” said the great Homer Simpson. “Fatherhood isn’t easy like motherhood.”

NY Times (5/15/07): As Demand for Donor Eggs Soars, High Prices Stir Ethical Concerns

no. 371

The linked articles discusses the prices offered egg donors, the possible medical effects on the egg donors but nowhere from what I see does it address the donor conceived individuals created.

There is a stat from the CDC that in 2003 approximately 5700 babies were born from donor eggs. Interesting that the CDC collects that stat but cannot require sperm banks or clinics to report births resulting froom donor sperm (not that I think they could accurately collect that info - see prior blog post).

Popularity of and Choosing a Sperm Donor

no. 337

In the last two weeks the NYT has now run two articles focusing on Donor Conception / Insemination and one letter to the editor. The newest article by Gina Kolata focuses on the choice of donors and Fairfax Cryobank's Donor 1913 and his alleged most popular status.

Anonymous Conception
Psst! Ask for Donor 1913
New York Times
By GINA KOLATA
Published: February 18, 2007

They Are Linked by Their Genes (1 Letter)
NYT Letters to the Editor
Published: February 20, 2007
Janine Baer

I plan to post the text of these articles to the Annex later this week for now the links are provided above to the NYT itself. My own reactiosn resulted in my submitting my own letter to the editor. If I don't hear from the NYT within I think two weeks, their time requirement, I will post it here. The crux of my letter involves male input into the selection process.

Emerging Donors – A DI Dads Dilemma

no. 336

Sperm Donor Father [CCB 150] Ends His Anonymity
NY Times
Amy Harmon
February 14, 2007

Hello, I’m Your Sister. Our Father is Donor 150
NY Times
Amy Harmon
November 20, 2005

The November 20, 2005 article was one of the first within Ms. Harmon’s series that graced the cover of the NY Times bringing the issues surrounding DI to the forefront of water cooler discussions in the past 18 months. Seeing today’s article bring some resolution to the identity issue for the donor conceived teenagers and young adults in the piece was nice to see, read, and feel a part of.

As a DI dad initial reactions are a curious thing. You are happy for these kids but then you wonder will my own kids have such a desire to meet / find their bio father? How will I feel when it’s a real man across the park they are walking towards? Long term it’s certainly a good thing from their perspective but it also makes you take stock of yourself and the reminder that your emotional reactions / needs must come second to theirs.

Not all DI dads will take this approach. Certainly most heterosexual couples still have not told their kids of their origins and that’s their decision. My kids know and will continue to be told their story so how will I feel when it’s their turn we’ll have to wait and see how life develops for them and for me.