As an infertility counsellor, I see a lot of clients who are using third-party family building strategies. This includes using sperm or egg donation and/or a gestational carrier.
For some, the decision to use donor egg or sperm is a no-brainer: they want children, they cannot use their own gametes, so they use someone else's. For these individuals the desire to parent is so strong, that they are unconcerned with the lack of biological tie that they themselves, or their partner, will have with the child.
This is not new, of course, since the same can be said for people who adopt. For others, however, coming to grips with having a child using someone else's gametes is a difficult decision, one that requires a lot of soul searching and contemplation. One of the many concerns these individuals have about family building using these methods is what they will tell their child.
As has become accepted practice with adoption, counsellors like myself who work in the area always recommend to Intended Parents (IPs) that they disclose the details of the child's conception to the child (rather than keep it secret), and that they do so as soon as possible.
When to do so depends on the child, but is generally appropriate when the child starts asking about where babies come from. This question can begin as early as age two!
Once the child asks where babies come from, I recommend that parents first give the basic information, in age appropriate terms, about sperm and egg. Then, in the case of egg/sperm donation, they say something like: "In our case, mommy's eggs (or daddy's sperm) were broken, so a nice man/woman (or Uncle Jon/cousin Sarah, etc. if it was a known donor) gave us some so we could have you!"
For same-sex couples (or a single woman), the conversation might include something like:
"There were no men in our family, so we went to a doctor who helped us get sperm from a nice man..."
When a child hears this story right from the beginning, he or she will accept it. It will simply be his/her birth story. The important part for the child will be knowing how badly he or she was wanted and how thrilled his/her parents were when they conceived.
What I have come to believe is that all children, even those conceived "the old fashioned way," should be aware of all the ways a family can be formed. In our house, I make a point of discussing family diversity with my two daughters. They understand that some kids have two mommies, some have two daddies, some kids look like their parents, and others do not. Some kids live with only one parent, and some kids have two full sets of parents. I think this is an important part of helping kids develop tolerance, open-mindedness and acceptance of differences.
If you are thinking that this is just going to complicate what already feels like a stressful task: discussing reproduction and sex with your children, fear not! There are now some great books for kids of all ages that discuss the wide variety of family forms that are now commonplace.
The one my kids have is called "It's Not the Stork" by Robie H. Harris. Reading about these issues to your child from an age-appropriate book, rather than sitting your child down for a formal, awkward face-to-face discussion can make the whole process much more comfortable. No one should feel ashamed of how they were conceived and educating our youth about the many ways families are formed and babies are made will help foster greater understanding and acceptance for family diversity.
Follow Erica Berman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/erica_HCT
I suppose the first thing is that the parents concerned have to get over and deal with any unfinished baggage they have around how they made a family. Once the parents feel whole with the story, and find that it touches their heart strings, they will naturally convey that feeling to their children.
If you model secrecy or shame, your child may run the risk of feeling that too. If you model honest feelings of love, appreciation, and how much of a gift this child was, then your child will most likely feel that way too.
There are many ways people can turn out to be different than what we think of as the norm. Being adopted or coming from a surrogate or a sperm donor, or egg donor is just one way. Being freckled, gay, bi, handicapped, gifted, driven, artistic, emotional, intuitive, curious, shy, etc. etc. are other ways of being "different". The point of being a parent is to raise independent children who are equipped to love their differences.
The term "family separation' is a terrible term and high negative. It doesn't do justice to the different ways of constituting a family. I'd hate to be a kid with parents who refer to me as having been separated from my family. How does someone ever get over that? How abusive!
Adoption is a positive choice for a person or people who are not prepared to take on the unbelievable burden of being a parent. Better to choose adoption than to regret having become a parent and giving your child a terrible life because you weren't ready. It's not a reaction to anything. It's a choice. And a loving choice made for a human life that you have determined you cannot properly take care of.
For a child to know that their birth parent chose to give them the best family ever because they could not be that parent is a statement full of love. To say to a child that when you're older and if you want to meet that birth parent, we will help you find them, and lucky you, you might end up with an even bigger loving family is beyond anything a child could hope for.
I got to point out though that humans are still the result of human reproduction, whether it is in a dish or a bedroom whether it involves a turkey baster whatever, in the end when a person is born that person will have two biological parents whose cells reproduced to create them. So in the world of donor reproductive therapy its the clinic customers who are helping the donors reproduce themselves by underwriting the effort financially. The donor does not help infertile people conceive or reproduce, the donor does that.
Other than that I agree with you of course. Its just real clear that the parent has to fail before the social paren
I disagree however with the author's statement that "The important part for the child will be knowing how badly he or she was wanted and how thrilled his/her parents were when they conceived." Telling them they are not related to you means that they are related to someone else - they have family they are not allowed to know who are not allowed to know them.
Your closing statement 'they have a family they are not allowed to know who are not allowed to know them' poses the question in my mind - would you tell these children it would have been better if they hadn't have been created at all?
That said - (and depending on laws in different areas I understand this differs) in many places even anonymous donors are required to release their identities to offspring once they reach 18 or 21 (relevant age of consent). Also as mentioned in the article many people use known donors such as family members and friends. What is your reaction to families created using donated gametes where the resultant child DOES in fact know their intended birth family as well as their biological family?
For what it's worth, I would hazard a guess that the known/unknown conundrum and disclosure of donors' identities is definitely a huge issue and nowhere near an easy decision even for those who do go down that road. But that is me assuming.
But that's another debate entirely. What I'm interested in, and what your reply didn't answer, is the two questions I originally asked:
"Your closing statement 'they have a family they are not allowed to know who are not allowed to know them' poses the question in my mind - would you tell these children [created by donor gametes from anonymous sources] it would have been better if they hadn't have been created at all?"
and
"What is your reaction to families created using donated gametes where the resultant child DOES in fact know their intended birth family as well as their biological family?" [examples given of friends/relatives donating gametes and being a part of the child's life in the article].
I can see where you're coming from with adoption, and I said nothing to disrespect people who choose that path because I think they are amazing people!
Characterizing adoption as "separated families" is not only negative and harmful to children who were adopted and who have loving families; it is indicative of a situation that seems to have been handled very badly by the adults concerned.
You would agree that your adopted children could not be adopted by you unless they had first been separated from their families, right? Everyone is the offspring of parents who reproduced to create them and their parents relatives are their relatives as well. We can say that those people don't matter, that they are inconsequential, lower than low, good for nothing dna donors and that we are not interested in them at all - but it does not make the family relationship go away. Since the people who reproduced are responsible for taking care of their offspring, they have to fail to take care of their offspring in order for their offspring to need to be cared for by someone else.
Adoption is wonderful but we need to remember that adopted people already have family, they have parents its just that their parents are not doing their job, not fulfilling their obligations. They're a complete family, they just are not functioning as one where the parents take care of their children. Adopted people expand upon their existing relationships by adding an adopted family. I'm sure that from the adoptive parent's point of view its different because