Posted on 05/21/2006 11:55:33 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
(CBS) CHICAGO It's a trend that some fear may have long-term consequences. More unmarried women over the age of 25 are not waiting for Mr. Right.
As CBS 2's Alita Guillen reports, these ladies are having children on their own.
The fantasy father at their fingertips is a sperm donor with all the right stuff.
Katherine Gehl and April Lashbrook had successful careers and dated, but they didn't have husbands. They heard their biological clocks ticking loudly.
"It was like a time bomb," April said.
"I need to go and have a baby and be a mother, and so I did," Katherine said.
Women used to depend on chemistry in the bedroom to conceive a child. Now, more and more women are turning to the lab and depending more on science than sex.
This twist on the mating game begins at a sperm bank, where donors can earn up to $900 a month.
"These guys are college students. This is a form of income," said California Cryobank Medical Director Dr. Cappy Rothman.
The sperm undergoes testing for diseases, genetic defects and blood type.
"Donor sperm, in many ways, is guaranteed good sperm," said Dr. Lauren Streicher, a gynecologist at Northwestern Memorial Hospital.
When April chose her donor in 2003, she got a long profile including a medical history and even written answers to questions.
"I knew immediately that was who I was going to choose," she said.
Now, many banks offer much more, including childhood photos and the donors' voices on CD.
Once chosen, the sperm remains frozen and stored until needed. Then it can be shipped anywhere.
While women can inseminate themselves at home, both April and Katherine used fertility specialists.
Many of these donors have already proven their fertility.
"It's an excellent way of getting pregnant because you usually have men who have confirmed pregnancy," said Dr. Brian Kaplan, a fertility specialist with Fertility Clinics of Illinois.
"We are creating a real potential disaster here," said Elizabeth Marquardt with New York City's Affiliate Scholar Institute for American Values.
Some critics are concerned that as this practice becomes more popular, and that with an unknown number of children from the same donor, that two of them might unknowingly hook up.
"In the future, we will have to have a DNA test with anyone we want to have sex with just to make sure we're not related to them," Marquardt said.
Many sperm banks say they try to limit pregnancies based on geographic area to reduce that risk. However, in a transient society, it may be hard to do.
Critics also worry how this might change the definition of family.
"As a society, we're saying fathers don't matter," Marquardt said.
Thirteen-year-old Liz Herzog, whose father is donor number 1002 from Virginia's Fairfax Cryobank, says she's happy with her life.
"I can't even say that once in a while I wish I had a father, because I don't," she said.
Through the Donor Sibling Registry Web site, she has discovered at least 10 half-sibling and has met seven, including Callie from Pennsylvania.
Liz's mother, Diana, thinks these newly forged relationships will last a lifetime.
"You can only hope that your child will be well-adjusted and happy enough when they grow up that they won't feel that they're missing too much," Diana Herzog said.
April's daughter, Julia, is now almost three years old.
"When she was born, it was just amazing," April said.
Katherine's daughter, Alexandra, is eight months old.
Both are enjoying every moment motherhood has to offer.
"It is so much greater than I had any idea," Katherine said.
April, Julia's mom, knows of six half-siblings so far.
All of the single moms we spoke with think the possibility of meeting and dating a half-sibling is very remote because they are very open or plan to be open with their children.
It is interesting to note that back when sperm banks first opened in the 1970s, it was all married couples seeking sperm donors. Doctors say those couples were more likely to keep it secret.
There have been some posters on this thread that have given me much pause because of their self-righteous sanctimony about others they know nothing about.
I first met this young woman when our now 2nd graders were starting kindergarten, I knew she was much younger than me, but I am no one to judge an other. Our lives were very different, and yet we share so much. She and her husband and daughters have a stable life, just like mine. I'm old enough to be her mother, but instead we are becoming very close friends.
I have all the respect in the world for this girl, she had some very hard decisions to make at a very young age. It is obvious the decisions she made do not meet with the approval of some here, but her life is not theirs to approve or disapprove of, is it?
In my day we sold blood.
Perhaps you could cite at least ONE specific inaccuracy in the post in question?
Guess you can call me one, too. I'll third it. (tipping my diet Coke)
Thanks. I'll be sure to tell it next time I'm down south...
It's So Nice To Have A Man Around The House
It's so nice to have a man around the house,
Oh,so nice to have a man around the hosue,
Someone sweet who's glad he found you,
Who will put his arms around you,
And his kisses just astound you, It's so nice,
Oh, a house is just a house without a man,
He's the necessary evil in your plan,
There are many things about him,
you just cannot do without him,
Tho' it's just a constant game of cat and mouse,
It's so nice to have a man around the house.
It's so nice to have a man around the house
Oh, it's so nice to have a man around the house
Not some boring, tired old geezer
He will win my love if he's a sort of
Antony or Caesar, now that's nice.
Oh, a barge is just a barge without a knave
Be he emperor or beggar, king or slave
I don't fancy growing older
With just a snake around my shoulder
Want a man who's brave and bold
Don't need no mouse
Someone tall and dark and tan
Who'll fit in to Cleo's plan
It's so nice to have a man around the house
Hmm, that's nice
The priest was wrong, failed her in his job, and went directly against what the Church teaches about the matter.
He is not there to be a cheerleader. He is there to help save souls, according to their faith.
Yes it was. Because you're advocating a single woman being a mother, period- regardless of how she has a child. Whether she adopts or chooses to have one of her own is irrelevant, especially is the moral argument if that the child will not have a father.
From reading you posts, you seem to be saying some here are claiming others on this thread are advocating draconian (i.e. abortion) measures, rather than raising children as close to the traditional model as possible. I see no such advocacy, though admittedly I haven't read every post.
Could you point to some comments that seem to be saying such?
At this point, it seems you are setting up a straw man against those who don't share your presumption of innocence for single mothers.
And before you get off on tangents, recognize my brother is the adopted child of a rape victim, so I am not uncomfortable speaking from experience.
Please accept my apology if I'm reading you wrong, and set me straight.
The decision should be put up for a vote by the congregation, along with hand outs that include her medical records.
Yes because being in a false marriage for the sole purpose of having a child is SO much better than being single. How would you like to be the man married to a woman who only married you to have a child? How long do you think that would last?
I hope you're joking.
How would you like to be the man married to a woman who only married you to have a child? How long do you think that would last?
What does she look like?
(Yes, I am joking. There's something about the public debate of highly personal issues and decisions made by folks we don't know that brings out the jokes)
As Justice Alito told the peanut gallery "I can show you the facts. I can't understand them for you." A woman who chooses to have a child while single makes a decision to have a child without the benefit of a father. A woman who adopts a child while single makes a decision to care for a child who has no chance at the best case scenario.
They don't give healthy newborns to single adoptees, you know. First preference goes to married, stable, couples.
My initial comment was made because of another post that stated the victim of a rape should place the child up for adoption instead of being a single mother. That comemnt, along with others along the lines of there being no justification for single mothers except in the case of widowhood or abandment prompted my response.
I don't see how you think I am setting up any strawman....I only spoke of my personal experience with my friend and her child and her family. As I know them I can not fathom any better outcome for mother or child than has occurred.
I only commented upon this one issue (concieved from rape) and prefaced my initial comment to that effect.
You're most welcome :-)
I tend to think of fear of change as a tendency best left to the loony leftists. They panic about every tenth of a degree of change in average global temperatures, lament the extinction of so much as a single insect species, and blame what most of us would call "progress" for practically every problem in the world. My all time favorite was the little crew of Western envirowackos who showed up at a global conference on environmental issues in Africa a couple of years ago, to press their campaign to stop the third world (before it's too late!) from pursuing Western menaces such as flush toilets -- never mind that they had flown to the conference on fuel-guzzling jumbo jets equipped with flush toilets! But alas, some "conservatives" are really no different, just picking a different list of things to panic (and sow panic) about.
As for me, I look forward to stuff like germ-line genetic engineering. Imagine when (not far off, in all likelihood) a young woman who carries one of the genes that virtually guarantees breast cancer, and watched her mother die young from it, can simply choose not to pass it on to her daughters and granddaughters, by having the single defective gene in her eggs swapped for a healthy one. In previous generations, there were plenty of people who felt we shouldn't develop airplanes, since "if God had meant for us to fly, he would have given us wings", and people who decried the use of antibiotics and other medical advances as interfering with God's plans for people to die. And of course much of the Arab world is presently convinced that civilization would collapse if women stopped hiding themselves under black tents. I don't buy any of it. Human history is one long march of progress, with just a few hiccups along the way, and I don't see any reason to think that the particular changes going on now will result in a U-turn.
Relax and enjoy the ride! Life is good, and will be even better for your children, and better still for your grandchildren!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.