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.
So now we're an English teacher? LOL! Anything to avoid answering the question.
I thought we had this settled earlier.
I defended women who chose single motherhood who were rape victims against the absolutists on this thread that said NO woman should EVER choose to be a single mother and if they find themselves pregnant should put the child up for adoption.
Funny, I always though redefining traditional principles which are "inconvenient" was the quintessential trait of a liberal. I guess I've got all those gop evangelicals all wrong...
They are choosing selfishness and pathetic, needy behavior by bring children into a less than ideal situation.
As far as the guys sell that their sperm for money, it is gross and immoral as applied in this context, but could help a couple that cannot have a child. All it takes is one man to impregnate any number of women.
No, I'm just enjoying the bridezilla-like vanity whereby you think that "question" actually deserves an answer, let alone believe it to be "succinct."
That's not a question. It's a petulant accusation masquerading as a question.
Traditional principles get re-defined all the time. The last time was post WWII when the nuclear family rose to prominance. Prior to that, multi-generational extended families were very, very common.
Folks have made the argument that one contributor to the high divorce rate has been the demise of the multi-generational extended family. After all, a husband is less likely to stray if he think his mother-in-law is going to be the one cleaning the lipstick out of his jockey shorts.
The point I'm making is that nothing in this world is static -- everything is subject to change and the influence of technology, economics, politics, and the television show The Family Guy.
So you are saying there is nothing wrong with the practice...after all, you have no idea if, or how often, such situations will turn out like your friend's. Don't you find your position somewhat doctrinaire?
Having some experience with such women, no guy can meet their ever-moving target.. they are destined to live out their lives alone with two cats.. or, God forbid, raising a mixed-up kid whose Dad is a turkey baster.
You don't seriously think these self-absorbed airheads quoted in the article are mature enough to hold down one end of a marriage, do you?
...They are terrifically smart, kind, and self-supporting. Now they are in their mid or late 30s and, being women, would still love to have a child.
Yes, and after pursuing the chimera of a career and putting marriage and children off for later, they discover the essential fact of biology: women have a "sell-by" date. Men don't.
They aren't bimbos, they don't party, many don't even drink, some are church-going. When guys their age want to get married, they can, and do, look for younger women with whom to have children.
It's cruel to your nice friends, but the biological dice are loaded against them. I am often vilified for pointing this out, as if I were the cause of the situation rather than an observer of it. Family members persisted in an expensive and frustrating IVF adventure than nearly destroyed their family... and the resulting child has issues. Don't get me wrong, he's a wonderful human being and an asset to the family, and everyone loves him every bit as much as if he were healthy and strong (except, perhaps, the insurance company, and whoever has to find money for special education programs. And well, adversity like this is why we have insurance and special ed).
I am a little unsure about the sperm donor thing,
Sure, that's a very, very personal decision. Reasonable people can reasonably have very different positions, and there's no harm in not having a position staked out... especially if this is not a factor in your own life or family.
...but would you have anything against these women adopting children, especially older kids?
I see that as a very different issue; in the one case, someone is making an altruistic decision to sacrifice some material wealth, convenience etc., for the sake of a kid with strange DNA, because otherwise the kid's just shafted. (By the way, that's what my brother and sister-in-law did for their next kid, adopt from the third world).
The IVF girls are creating a new kid, even "styling" it through donor selection, as a posession, or a pet. That to me is way different than adopting a kid that someone else couldn't or didn't take care of. The motivation counts
Isn't it better for a child to have 1 loving parent than none?
But that's not really the option here is it? These kids are only being created, in a mechanistic and unnatural way, for the self-actualization of the moms.
I empathize with my friends who would love to have kids but whose unmarried status puts them in a bind.
I too empathize with your friends, but unfortunately decisions do have consequences, and putting off a decision is actually a decision, even if it doesn't feel like one when you're immature.
Some fatherless kids turn out perfect. Many, most, turn out functional. Some wind up like a fellow I know, very high-functioning but completely self-serving; two short steps away from being a sociopath. Some wind up worse than him.
Do you think the two gals' daughters from the article will turn out OK? Think they'll be able to form healthy relationships with men? Who are they going to learn it from? Not their moms, that's for damn sure...
d.o.l.
Criminal Number 18F
Oh that's right. I forgot you already answered it anyway. Your answer was yes.
No, they don't. The principles remain the same, even though the context is ever shifting.
My wife has a quaint way of putting it: the only difference between us and them is indoor toilets...
I have been married to a wonderful man for 23 years and we have 3 children together. He is my second husband. My first husband and I were divorced when our son was 4 years old.
I think what helped to make my second marriage successful was that my first husband raised my oldest child. Sons need fathers. My son is now 36. He is a devoted husband and father of 5.Other women thought I was an unnatural mother to leave my son with his father, but I knew in my heart that his father would be very important to him in the long run.
I married a lady with 2 children and for 25 years, they have brought more love and blessings into my life than I could possible imagine and I now also have two wonderful grandchildren.
Because I was part of his life when a boy needs a father the most, this fine young man now has 3 step children plus one of his own with a wonderful girl. To him, it was normal and not something to run from.
I know that because of my son, these 3 young children will be part of the solution and not part of the problem that is rampant amongst today's fatherless youth.
The principles remain the same, even though the context is ever shifting.
No idea what that means. I was talking about very, very basic structure that defined the family dynamic. In regards to "indoor toilets," there was a whole lot of difference between the old times and the present day. Most of the population lived in rural areas well into the 20th century -- this essentially meant living in a "factory" where every member of the family worked and worked damned hard. Women were either feeding something, killing something or cooking something. And they were doing it without modern appliances. Contrasted to today where there's very little feeding, killing or cooking going on...
There, fixed it.
Truly sad. Friday was my youngest son's prom. At the pre-prom gathering for photo's etc., I watched the fathers of the gals. They were so proud of their duaghters and, you could see it in their eyes, the girls really loved their fathers.
I said no such thing. Therefore your question is irrelevent.
You are choosing to make an absolutist statement, I'm saying because there are exceptions to the rule the abosolutist ideal of all children conceived of rape should be placed for adoption is wrong.
You really should not bother. The majority of these people arguing for single motherhood are probably just trying to justify their own stupidity or selfishness.
If you've read any of my posts on the topic, I don't let the women off, either. I'm opposed to irresponsible parenting. Right now, there are more irresponsible dads. We know this because their sons and daughters fill the halls of detention, alternate campuses, juvenile facilities, and prisons.
So was I.
When I saw the title, I thought so what's new? Women haven't picked Mr Right for a long time.
At least now they seem to be more selective about the sperm donor.
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.