Egg donor dilemma
March 15, 2010 1:18 AM Subscribe
I'd like to donate my eggs, but I don't want to give them to "just anyone"... Is it morally defendable of me to demand the recipients tick certain boxes and hence disqualify others?
So I've had an IVF egg collection which was very successful and resulted in a large number of eggs in frozen storage (plus a baby for me, yay!). They are of high quality and are in demand for donation. I would like to donate my eggs, but not unconditionally. I find that I have a strong need to control this process.
I'd prefer to donate to single people or gay couples. I'd also like to ensure that the recipient/s have strong non-religious values, and share my view on child rearing and what's important in life in terms of love and happiness. I'd like to somehow interview and select them myself, instead of leaving it in the hands of a fertility clinic who might give my precious eggs to a person/couple whose values I strongly disagree with. Worst case scenario is that I give people the opportunity to procreate when that is the last thing they should be doing, such as ku klux klan members or those fist pumping morons from Jersey Shore on MTV. You know what I mean.
On one hand I feel that these are eggs I've produced, they contain my genes, and therefore I should be able to choose who they go to, right? On the other hand the potential ramifications of this process nauseate me a little bit - who am I to "play god"?
I realise that a very easy solution would be to just discard the eggs and forget about donating altogether. However I would love to help someone out and play a small (yet large) part in creating a happy family somewhere. I would not want to actively partake in the child's life, but I like the idea of regular updates/photos and potentially meeting them when they're older.
How do you feel about this and what would you do in my situation?
(Please assume that all of this is in fact legal and possible where I am - which I'm fairly certain it will be by the time I'm ready to donate.)
So I've had an IVF egg collection which was very successful and resulted in a large number of eggs in frozen storage (plus a baby for me, yay!). They are of high quality and are in demand for donation. I would like to donate my eggs, but not unconditionally. I find that I have a strong need to control this process.
I'd prefer to donate to single people or gay couples. I'd also like to ensure that the recipient/s have strong non-religious values, and share my view on child rearing and what's important in life in terms of love and happiness. I'd like to somehow interview and select them myself, instead of leaving it in the hands of a fertility clinic who might give my precious eggs to a person/couple whose values I strongly disagree with. Worst case scenario is that I give people the opportunity to procreate when that is the last thing they should be doing, such as ku klux klan members or those fist pumping morons from Jersey Shore on MTV. You know what I mean.
On one hand I feel that these are eggs I've produced, they contain my genes, and therefore I should be able to choose who they go to, right? On the other hand the potential ramifications of this process nauseate me a little bit - who am I to "play god"?
I realise that a very easy solution would be to just discard the eggs and forget about donating altogether. However I would love to help someone out and play a small (yet large) part in creating a happy family somewhere. I would not want to actively partake in the child's life, but I like the idea of regular updates/photos and potentially meeting them when they're older.
How do you feel about this and what would you do in my situation?
(Please assume that all of this is in fact legal and possible where I am - which I'm fairly certain it will be by the time I'm ready to donate.)
As far as regular updates, I think that's a little far out. I mean, sperm donors don't get regular updates on their biological children; why should it be different for you? Sure, women have to go through a lot more to donate eggs than men do to donate sperm, but you didn't go through it solely to donate; you conceived your own child this way and then decided to donate the rest of the eggs. A friend of mine put it this way when she had foster children: She said she wanted a closed adoption because if she had to write a letter to a biological mother every year on how the kid was doing, she'd feel like she was just babysitting. With donor eggs, a woman is choosing to put herself through pregnancy and childbirth and I can't see a lot of them feeling like updates are an option. Of course there might be people out there who don't mind at all.
Personally I don't see anything wrong with you preferring to donate to couples that share your beliefs, if the agency allows you to specify a preference. But is this sort of thing as in-depth as a biological parent who gives up a child for adoption? I can't imagine the interview process with the potential parents is as in-depth, and think about how you would feel if you chose a couple who harmed the kid in some way, even unintentional. Would you feel awful knowing that this child was depressed and miserable? Or abused? What if the parent(s) has/have "strong non-religious values" when you meet but then find Jesus? Are you the kind of person who would say to yourself, "oh man, if I only hadn't picked the woman whose brother was a child molester, this kid wouldn't have been abused." I would maybe choose the gay couple or single parent option, if I were you, but not choose the particular parent or set of parents. This is all just an opinion, of course.
posted by IndigoRain at 1:42 AM on March 15, 2010
Personally I don't see anything wrong with you preferring to donate to couples that share your beliefs, if the agency allows you to specify a preference. But is this sort of thing as in-depth as a biological parent who gives up a child for adoption? I can't imagine the interview process with the potential parents is as in-depth, and think about how you would feel if you chose a couple who harmed the kid in some way, even unintentional. Would you feel awful knowing that this child was depressed and miserable? Or abused? What if the parent(s) has/have "strong non-religious values" when you meet but then find Jesus? Are you the kind of person who would say to yourself, "oh man, if I only hadn't picked the woman whose brother was a child molester, this kid wouldn't have been abused." I would maybe choose the gay couple or single parent option, if I were you, but not choose the particular parent or set of parents. This is all just an opinion, of course.
posted by IndigoRain at 1:42 AM on March 15, 2010
The moral problem is that if it is o.k. for you to discriminate, then it must also be o.k. for other people to discriminate and would you support that if it was those KKK members wanting to discriminate on racist grounds? You can't have a morally consistent process and allow one and not the other.
I don't know what the situation is like where you are but when I was looking at sperm donation in the UK it appeared that clinics varied in their attitude to working with single women and gay couples. If you want to make a choice about where your eggs go then the ethical way to do so would be to ensure that they are used by a clinic that supports your position on access to IVF for single women and gay couples.
posted by tallus at 1:49 AM on March 15, 2010 [8 favorites]
I don't know what the situation is like where you are but when I was looking at sperm donation in the UK it appeared that clinics varied in their attitude to working with single women and gay couples. If you want to make a choice about where your eggs go then the ethical way to do so would be to ensure that they are used by a clinic that supports your position on access to IVF for single women and gay couples.
posted by tallus at 1:49 AM on March 15, 2010 [8 favorites]
Are they eggs of embryos? You need to clarify that. I didn't know eggs could be frozen successfully, only embryos.
posted by taff at 2:18 AM on March 15, 2010
posted by taff at 2:18 AM on March 15, 2010
Going down your path a few years, here's another ethical problem. Let's say I'm the person who received the donation. You think I'm a great recipient for your egg. Ten years in, you receive my annual update from me and discover I've done one of the things you think people shouldn't do. Now what? You take me to court, for breach of contract or something? You fight for custody of my child?
If you can't let go of the need to control and be involved, then I think donating your eggs at all will not be the right choice for you, as it will lead to constant heartache, worry, and grief. If you can trust in our imperfect system for child protection and welfare, without your personal involvement, then I think you should donate -- with no strings attached.
If I had to interview for an egg, and answer extensive questions, and promise annual updates, I would look elsewhere on principle (and as IndigoRain's friend says, I would feel like I'm just babysitting).
This is just my opinion, as a single, 39-year-old, child-free woman.
posted by Houstonian at 2:58 AM on March 15, 2010 [14 favorites]
If you can't let go of the need to control and be involved, then I think donating your eggs at all will not be the right choice for you, as it will lead to constant heartache, worry, and grief. If you can trust in our imperfect system for child protection and welfare, without your personal involvement, then I think you should donate -- with no strings attached.
If I had to interview for an egg, and answer extensive questions, and promise annual updates, I would look elsewhere on principle (and as IndigoRain's friend says, I would feel like I'm just babysitting).
This is just my opinion, as a single, 39-year-old, child-free woman.
posted by Houstonian at 2:58 AM on March 15, 2010 [14 favorites]
It's one of the reasons I can't donate, not because I don't think donation is a good idea, but I feel a responsibility to my donated cells that will potentially be a human being. If I am in my immediate descendants' lives, I can act to improve them, but as a donor I cannot, and that's why I won't. I admire women (and men) who do.
posted by b33j at 3:24 AM on March 15, 2010
posted by b33j at 3:24 AM on March 15, 2010
Best answer: I'd prefer to donate to single people or gay couples. I'd also like to ensure that the recipient/s have strong non-religious values, and share my view on child rearing and what's important in life in terms of love and happiness.
Perhaps you could contact a local organization that shares and supports these values in your community, that could in turn connect you(r eggs) with 'compatible' people? You'd be offering a step that singles or gay couples often struggle with.
I think if you approach the question with the outlook of including specific people, rather than excluding most people, you'll feel less like you're playing god and more like you're helping Couple Z out immensely.
My views on fist-pumping morons, or others of their ilk, notwithstanding.
posted by a halcyon day at 3:33 AM on March 15, 2010 [2 favorites]
Perhaps you could contact a local organization that shares and supports these values in your community, that could in turn connect you(r eggs) with 'compatible' people? You'd be offering a step that singles or gay couples often struggle with.
I think if you approach the question with the outlook of including specific people, rather than excluding most people, you'll feel less like you're playing god and more like you're helping Couple Z out immensely.
My views on fist-pumping morons, or others of their ilk, notwithstanding.
posted by a halcyon day at 3:33 AM on March 15, 2010 [2 favorites]
I'd prefer to donate to single people or gay couples. I'd also like to ensure that the recipient/s have strong non-religious values, and share my view on child rearing and what's important in life in terms of love and happiness.
You're being way too controlling here and you shouldn't be donating because you want to micro manage the process, IMO. There are perfectly valid hetero couples that have have strong religious values that could do a great job raising a child. From what you've written, you're just another side of the KKK coin, so sure of your moral superiority that you don't even want to give others outside your narrow vision a chance. IMO, you're one of the last people who should be controlling this process.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:54 AM on March 15, 2010 [16 favorites]
You're being way too controlling here and you shouldn't be donating because you want to micro manage the process, IMO. There are perfectly valid hetero couples that have have strong religious values that could do a great job raising a child. From what you've written, you're just another side of the KKK coin, so sure of your moral superiority that you don't even want to give others outside your narrow vision a chance. IMO, you're one of the last people who should be controlling this process.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:54 AM on March 15, 2010 [16 favorites]
I'd like to add something.
How do you think your responses would be (or be different) if your second paragraph left out some of your criteria, like this:
I'd prefer to donate to single people or gay couples. I'd also like to ensure that the recipient/s have strong non-religious values, and share my view on child rearing and what's important in life in terms of love and happiness. I'd like to somehow interview and select them myself, instead of leaving it in the hands of a fertility clinic who might give my precious eggs to a person/couple whose values I strongly disagree with. Worst case scenario is that I give people the opportunity to procreate when that is the last thing they should be doing, such as ku klux klan members or those fist pumping morons from Jersey Shore on MTV. You know what I mean.
Do you think there would be a pile-on? Would you worry about the precedent this thinking could set?
posted by Houstonian at 3:58 AM on March 15, 2010 [2 favorites]
How do you think your responses would be (or be different) if your second paragraph left out some of your criteria, like this:
Do you think there would be a pile-on? Would you worry about the precedent this thinking could set?
posted by Houstonian at 3:58 AM on March 15, 2010 [2 favorites]
Response by poster: Thanks for your answers so far, appreciate it.
Scratch the 'regular updates' part, it's not really that important to me. From what I've heard it's pretty common though, because the egg recipient and donor tend to become close through the process and it's preferred by both parties. Personally I don't think I'd mind updating the donor if I were the recipient, but that's another topic.
posted by heytch at 4:06 AM on March 15, 2010
Scratch the 'regular updates' part, it's not really that important to me. From what I've heard it's pretty common though, because the egg recipient and donor tend to become close through the process and it's preferred by both parties. Personally I don't think I'd mind updating the donor if I were the recipient, but that's another topic.
posted by heytch at 4:06 AM on March 15, 2010
Response by poster: You're being way too controlling here and you shouldn't be donating because you want to micro manage the process, IMO. There are perfectly valid hetero couples that have have strong religious values that could do a great job raising a child. From what you've written, you're just another side of the KKK coin, so sure of your moral superiority that you don't even want to give others outside your narrow vision a chance. IMO, you're one of the last people who should be controlling this process.
I see what you're saying and this pinpoints what mildly nauseates me about my own plan.
But! If a KKK person wanted to donate gametes, I'm sure they would exclude me too and that doesn't offend me. And I get to choose which charity I donate my money to, right? It's not discriminatory of me to choose Red Cross over Salvation Army. So how is this different?
posted by heytch at 4:23 AM on March 15, 2010 [1 favorite]
I see what you're saying and this pinpoints what mildly nauseates me about my own plan.
But! If a KKK person wanted to donate gametes, I'm sure they would exclude me too and that doesn't offend me. And I get to choose which charity I donate my money to, right? It's not discriminatory of me to choose Red Cross over Salvation Army. So how is this different?
posted by heytch at 4:23 AM on March 15, 2010 [1 favorite]
But think how you'd feel, as the recipient of a donated egg, someone desperate to have a child, if the donor put your through an interview process and made all kinds of arbitrary judgements about your lifestyle and beliefs. Imagine that somehow you satisfy the donor that you're sufficiently non-christian, sufficiently middle-class, that you read all the right books and vote for the right party. Having made it through this highly intrusive screening process, you then have to commit to reporting regularly on your child's progress to the egg donor, putting yourself in a position where you're judged to be worthy or unworthy entirely on someone else's whim, hover that whim may change.
Does it still feel like your child? I doubt it would. Please don't donate anything, whether it be a an egg or a sack of old clothes, if you feel you should continue to have a claim over it.
posted by le morte de bea arthur at 4:23 AM on March 15, 2010 [4 favorites]
Does it still feel like your child? I doubt it would. Please don't donate anything, whether it be a an egg or a sack of old clothes, if you feel you should continue to have a claim over it.
posted by le morte de bea arthur at 4:23 AM on March 15, 2010 [4 favorites]
hover = however of course.
posted by le morte de bea arthur at 4:24 AM on March 15, 2010
posted by le morte de bea arthur at 4:24 AM on March 15, 2010
And I get to choose which charity I donate my money to, right? It's not discriminatory of me to choose Red Cross over Salvation Army. So how is this different?
Because when you're donating to Red Cross or the Salvation Army, you're trusting the organization to put your money to good use, you're not micro managing the process.
Now you want to micro mange the process, not because it's a good idea, but because you can, you feel your eggs are special snowflakes, which is understandable, and you want to make sure they go a good family.
But are you capable of judging others, of determining who will make a good family? Based on your narrow and extremely biased criteria I personally would say no, you should not be determining who can and can't be a parent. You're not doing what's best for a potential child by trying to pick the best family you find, period. You want to push your own agenda, best family be damned. You're interested in making a statement first and good family second or even third and to me, that's someone who should be barred from doing what you're proposing.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:02 AM on March 15, 2010 [1 favorite]
Because when you're donating to Red Cross or the Salvation Army, you're trusting the organization to put your money to good use, you're not micro managing the process.
Now you want to micro mange the process, not because it's a good idea, but because you can, you feel your eggs are special snowflakes, which is understandable, and you want to make sure they go a good family.
But are you capable of judging others, of determining who will make a good family? Based on your narrow and extremely biased criteria I personally would say no, you should not be determining who can and can't be a parent. You're not doing what's best for a potential child by trying to pick the best family you find, period. You want to push your own agenda, best family be damned. You're interested in making a statement first and good family second or even third and to me, that's someone who should be barred from doing what you're proposing.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:02 AM on March 15, 2010 [1 favorite]
le morte de bea arthur: Please don't donate anything, whether it be a an egg or a sack of old clothes, if you feel you should continue to have a claim over it.
This. OP I think you are unclear on the concept of "donate." As a non-religious single mother who disagrees with the KKK and would look rather ridiculous if she tried to fist-pump, I think your idea is fundamentally flawed. When you give something to someone else, it's no longer yours. Either give 100% or don't give at all.
posted by headnsouth at 5:21 AM on March 15, 2010 [10 favorites]
This. OP I think you are unclear on the concept of "donate." As a non-religious single mother who disagrees with the KKK and would look rather ridiculous if she tried to fist-pump, I think your idea is fundamentally flawed. When you give something to someone else, it's no longer yours. Either give 100% or don't give at all.
posted by headnsouth at 5:21 AM on March 15, 2010 [10 favorites]
We're talking about here a very modern luxury that lets people experience the novelty of giving birth when they can't actually produce kids.
This is a tad offensive to me, a person who needs an egg donor. Cancer, disease, heartache etc take a woman to considering this position, not 'ooh, wonder what new novelty in the birthing area I can try for size.' And, not to get derailed, but it isn't really an unfathomable, modern luxury that a woman [or a man for that matter] farms out part of the birth making process. Bible yarns etc. Anyhoo. Just saying.
I can understand your point of view about wanting the best for your biological donation heytch. Maybe the compromise would be to allocate the eggs to the 'best' agency possible, then wave goodbye with love. I guess that's what I understand 'donating' to be.
posted by honey-barbara at 5:34 AM on March 15, 2010 [3 favorites]
This is a tad offensive to me, a person who needs an egg donor. Cancer, disease, heartache etc take a woman to considering this position, not 'ooh, wonder what new novelty in the birthing area I can try for size.' And, not to get derailed, but it isn't really an unfathomable, modern luxury that a woman [or a man for that matter] farms out part of the birth making process. Bible yarns etc. Anyhoo. Just saying.
I can understand your point of view about wanting the best for your biological donation heytch. Maybe the compromise would be to allocate the eggs to the 'best' agency possible, then wave goodbye with love. I guess that's what I understand 'donating' to be.
posted by honey-barbara at 5:34 AM on March 15, 2010 [3 favorites]
Are you, or have you recently been, pregnant? As you know, with pregnancy comes a surge of hormones, some of which affect your emotions. In general, this is good -- you feel protective, you want to create a safe nest, you become more aware of your body and the miracle of life. I'm not dismissing your dilemma or your desires, but is it possible that some of this thinking comes from hormones? Perhaps you have always felt this way, and perhaps you will feel this way even 30 years from now. But, you might wait a few years to come to a final conclusion either way, just in case.
posted by Houstonian at 5:37 AM on March 15, 2010
posted by Houstonian at 5:37 AM on March 15, 2010
I think it's awesome that you want to donate your eggs to gay couples and single people!
These are groups that get systemically overlooked when it comes to these things -- any statement claiming that you're "discriminatory" for paying attention to the marginalized seems seriously flawed. It strikes me as perhaps a reflection of the poster's resistance or discomfort in acknowledging the priviledge & power they *do* get to enjoy, while others don't.
We could play the analogy game forever -- but at it's root -- you are attending to groups who, because of homophobia and heterosexism, get passed over way too often. I'd suggest that once you donate something, it's definitely no longer yours anymore, but I really don't see anything wrong with wanting to make sure it gets to groups that are routinely discriminated against in this sort of process.
posted by crawfo at 5:45 AM on March 15, 2010 [7 favorites]
These are groups that get systemically overlooked when it comes to these things -- any statement claiming that you're "discriminatory" for paying attention to the marginalized seems seriously flawed. It strikes me as perhaps a reflection of the poster's resistance or discomfort in acknowledging the priviledge & power they *do* get to enjoy, while others don't.
We could play the analogy game forever -- but at it's root -- you are attending to groups who, because of homophobia and heterosexism, get passed over way too often. I'd suggest that once you donate something, it's definitely no longer yours anymore, but I really don't see anything wrong with wanting to make sure it gets to groups that are routinely discriminated against in this sort of process.
posted by crawfo at 5:45 AM on March 15, 2010 [7 favorites]
Isn't the process micromanaged already, though, in favour of couples and heterosexuals (depending on where the OP lives)? You could argue pretty convincingly, and positively, that she's wanting to act to tip the balance a little more back to even for people who're discriminated against in this process ordinarily. She's not stopping fist-pumping morons from parenting via a similar process (presumably using some other donor's eggs); but those people are likely to be favoured over perfectly good parents who'd be shut out of the process because they're single or gay. Why not shoot for the losing team for a change and give them a chance too?
Re interviewing them yourself, though, yeah, that's gotta be a shitty ordeal for the prospective parents to have to go through. This must be one benefit of a central organisation doing the matchmaking: the wannabe parents only have to go through the one interview, not one with every potential donor. Why not pursue the suggestion about looking for some place that works with singles and gay couples and let them take it from there?
posted by springbound at 6:05 AM on March 15, 2010 [5 favorites]
Re interviewing them yourself, though, yeah, that's gotta be a shitty ordeal for the prospective parents to have to go through. This must be one benefit of a central organisation doing the matchmaking: the wannabe parents only have to go through the one interview, not one with every potential donor. Why not pursue the suggestion about looking for some place that works with singles and gay couples and let them take it from there?
posted by springbound at 6:05 AM on March 15, 2010 [5 favorites]
This is already done, and pretty damn standard. Those of us who are infertile are examined and picked through and judged and chosen by fertility doctors, social workers, adoption agencies, the state, fertility clinics, potential surrogates, birth mothers/fathers/parents wishing to adopt out, potential egg donors and potential embryo donors. We write long pamphlets spilling every details of our lives so that other people can decide whether or not we are worthy to be parents. If you want to participate in that system, there is already a deeply entrenched system favoring your doing so, particularly if the question above suggesting you probably have cryopreserved embryos rather than eggs is correct.
I've spent enough air in my life arguing my feelings on the ethics and morality of the above system. If you want to participate in it, doing so will be easy. On the other hand, we cannot always pick and choose the circumstances that will affect parents. We cannot consider every option. We cannot know what would be right in every circumstance, and trying to predetermine the answers to long term, multi-faceted questions like 'What kind of parents would they be?' is probably impossible to do with enough accuracy to be useful. Parents go into IVF (and adoption) because they desperately want to be loving parents. While I think some basic level of 'getting to know you' is important for all sides emotional comfort zone, you should know there's already a lot of judgmentalism. You sound like you want to make it easier for people who (a) you percieve to have values or identies you endorse and who (b) you perceive to be disadvantaged in the system. On the other hand, are you sure that people who satisfy criteria (a) and (b) will be the best parents for a child whose personality, or health status, you don't know? Are you sure they will be better than parents who satisfy only some of your requirements? I don't think there's an easy answer - many above seem to think there is an obvious answer one way or another. I think that if you want to be a restrictive donor, you will be joining a pool where most donors are restrictive so you'll find it easy and your decisions echoed back. Are you more interested in finding a mini you to raise your child, in ticking off a list of socially-desirable characteristics, or in just opening your heart to finding a great person or people who want to raise a child? At the end of the day, what is most important to you?
Finally, having a "strong" need to control this process is a danger sign, in my opinion. That sends up warning signs, red flags, etc. that you will not be happy with this decision in the long run. You will not be able to control this process.
posted by bunnycup at 6:06 AM on March 15, 2010 [12 favorites]
I've spent enough air in my life arguing my feelings on the ethics and morality of the above system. If you want to participate in it, doing so will be easy. On the other hand, we cannot always pick and choose the circumstances that will affect parents. We cannot consider every option. We cannot know what would be right in every circumstance, and trying to predetermine the answers to long term, multi-faceted questions like 'What kind of parents would they be?' is probably impossible to do with enough accuracy to be useful. Parents go into IVF (and adoption) because they desperately want to be loving parents. While I think some basic level of 'getting to know you' is important for all sides emotional comfort zone, you should know there's already a lot of judgmentalism. You sound like you want to make it easier for people who (a) you percieve to have values or identies you endorse and who (b) you perceive to be disadvantaged in the system. On the other hand, are you sure that people who satisfy criteria (a) and (b) will be the best parents for a child whose personality, or health status, you don't know? Are you sure they will be better than parents who satisfy only some of your requirements? I don't think there's an easy answer - many above seem to think there is an obvious answer one way or another. I think that if you want to be a restrictive donor, you will be joining a pool where most donors are restrictive so you'll find it easy and your decisions echoed back. Are you more interested in finding a mini you to raise your child, in ticking off a list of socially-desirable characteristics, or in just opening your heart to finding a great person or people who want to raise a child? At the end of the day, what is most important to you?
Finally, having a "strong" need to control this process is a danger sign, in my opinion. That sends up warning signs, red flags, etc. that you will not be happy with this decision in the long run. You will not be able to control this process.
posted by bunnycup at 6:06 AM on March 15, 2010 [12 favorites]
I find that I have a strong need to control this process.
Not only can you not control other people, but you definitely can't control the way other people's children turn out. Hell, you can't even control the way your OWN children turn out. In my experience you can guide children but humans are so complex that they embody the law of unintended consequences. Things you do to try and control often have the exact opposite effect of what you desire. Just let go.
posted by infinitefloatingbrains at 6:14 AM on March 15, 2010 [3 favorites]
Not only can you not control other people, but you definitely can't control the way other people's children turn out. Hell, you can't even control the way your OWN children turn out. In my experience you can guide children but humans are so complex that they embody the law of unintended consequences. Things you do to try and control often have the exact opposite effect of what you desire. Just let go.
posted by infinitefloatingbrains at 6:14 AM on March 15, 2010 [3 favorites]
I haven't read through all the responses, but about a year ago I was exploring egg donation pretty seriously. Your requirements would disqualify you from all of the organizations I spoke with.
My understanding is that the woman who is doing the donating is basically being "farmed"--you give what you've got, you get paid, and you forget it ever happened. You're thoroughly psychologically screened to make sure you are not going to ever come after the kid, asking for custody or visitation or anything else. If the organization feels that you are going to micro-manage the process or that you want to direct where your eggs go, they will likely not accept your application.
Not saying this is right, necessarily, but that that's the way it is. If you want to donate your eggs to a specific couple who are having problems conceiving, you should be able to do that (and I believe you can, but it won't work like the more common egg donation where you're paid bundles of money).
posted by peanut_mcgillicuty at 6:29 AM on March 15, 2010
My understanding is that the woman who is doing the donating is basically being "farmed"--you give what you've got, you get paid, and you forget it ever happened. You're thoroughly psychologically screened to make sure you are not going to ever come after the kid, asking for custody or visitation or anything else. If the organization feels that you are going to micro-manage the process or that you want to direct where your eggs go, they will likely not accept your application.
Not saying this is right, necessarily, but that that's the way it is. If you want to donate your eggs to a specific couple who are having problems conceiving, you should be able to do that (and I believe you can, but it won't work like the more common egg donation where you're paid bundles of money).
posted by peanut_mcgillicuty at 6:29 AM on March 15, 2010
Though I sympathize with your desire not to aid and abet fundamentalism, I throw my support in with the people here who are accusing you of attempting to micro-manage this process. Your control ends at the point that you give the gift. Gifts with strings attached aren't gifts; they're grants. And, culturally, we, up to this point, have tended to treat organ and tissue donations as gifts. I suppose it could have been otherwise, but it hasn't worked out that way so far.
A hypothetical: If you see a man on the street who looks hungry and asks you for a dollar to "get something to eat," you can either give the dollar and hope for the best or you can keep your dollar and keep walking. Ethically, I think the better position is to give the dollar, assuming you can afford to do so, and never think about it again. If the hungry person deceived you, that's on him, not you. But you could also choose to keep the dollar, sure in your mind that some bad could come of it. And, on that point, many people would agree with you.
The KKK bit is a non-issue, as no KKK-er would trust that the eggs were "pure." In fact, I'd think, in the vast majority of cases, that anyone willing to go through the long-winded process of conceiving a child in this way would be a good candidate for parenthood, simply because there would be plenty of points at which a person less committed to the idea would bail.
posted by wheat at 6:42 AM on March 15, 2010
A hypothetical: If you see a man on the street who looks hungry and asks you for a dollar to "get something to eat," you can either give the dollar and hope for the best or you can keep your dollar and keep walking. Ethically, I think the better position is to give the dollar, assuming you can afford to do so, and never think about it again. If the hungry person deceived you, that's on him, not you. But you could also choose to keep the dollar, sure in your mind that some bad could come of it. And, on that point, many people would agree with you.
The KKK bit is a non-issue, as no KKK-er would trust that the eggs were "pure." In fact, I'd think, in the vast majority of cases, that anyone willing to go through the long-winded process of conceiving a child in this way would be a good candidate for parenthood, simply because there would be plenty of points at which a person less committed to the idea would bail.
posted by wheat at 6:42 AM on March 15, 2010
Are they eggs of embryos? You need to clarify that. I didn't know eggs could be frozen successfully, only embryos.
She said they're eggs. She doesn't need to clarify that they're not embryos just because you don't know anything about the topic she's asking about.
posted by amro at 6:43 AM on March 15, 2010 [5 favorites]
She said they're eggs. She doesn't need to clarify that they're not embryos just because you don't know anything about the topic she's asking about.
posted by amro at 6:43 AM on March 15, 2010 [5 favorites]
For what it's worth, close friends of mine (who will be wonderful parents) are frustrated because their options are limited, not only by the fact they're both men, but also by the fact they're both Jewish.
Yes, you read that right; apparently, as they've looked, they've found many of the donors adoption/surrogacy agencies are unwilling to allow their [insert your preferred term for what is, effectively, genetic material] to be raised by Jewish adoptive parents. My friends have surmised that if Jewish parents are out with many donors, gay Jewish parents are way out. It is unfortunate, perhaps, but c'est la vie.
Discrimination is a fact of life, and the OP might wish to balance that out a bit. Is that so bad? You're doing something incredibly nice for someone by donating. There's no requirement that you do so. You should, in my opinion, at least have some say in who you do the nice thing for.
posted by JMOZ at 7:05 AM on March 15, 2010 [4 favorites]
Yes, you read that right; apparently, as they've looked, they've found many of the donors adoption/surrogacy agencies are unwilling to allow their [insert your preferred term for what is, effectively, genetic material] to be raised by Jewish adoptive parents. My friends have surmised that if Jewish parents are out with many donors, gay Jewish parents are way out. It is unfortunate, perhaps, but c'est la vie.
Discrimination is a fact of life, and the OP might wish to balance that out a bit. Is that so bad? You're doing something incredibly nice for someone by donating. There's no requirement that you do so. You should, in my opinion, at least have some say in who you do the nice thing for.
posted by JMOZ at 7:05 AM on March 15, 2010 [4 favorites]
I went through a similar thought process several years ago. Donating eggs is not the same as donating used clothing - you're donating a person, basically. It's a lot closer to giving a child up for adoption than giving cash to the Salvation Army. And I, personally, couldn't give up a child for adoption to someone who didn't share my values. There are already too many people out there letting their children run wild in stores, teaching them intolerance, feeding them junk food, letting them waste their lives playing video games.
So FWIW, you're not alone in your thinking. I don't think updates are a great idea, but I do think it's understandable and not unreasonable to want to vet prospective recepients in the same way you would adoptive parents. As a society, we do nearly that much before we let pets get adopted from an animal shelter; I don't think a potential child deserves less. The specifics of how you would go about it can vary, but I understand and agree with the basic idea.
posted by MexicanYenta at 7:08 AM on March 15, 2010 [1 favorite]
So FWIW, you're not alone in your thinking. I don't think updates are a great idea, but I do think it's understandable and not unreasonable to want to vet prospective recepients in the same way you would adoptive parents. As a society, we do nearly that much before we let pets get adopted from an animal shelter; I don't think a potential child deserves less. The specifics of how you would go about it can vary, but I understand and agree with the basic idea.
posted by MexicanYenta at 7:08 AM on March 15, 2010 [1 favorite]
I find that I have a strong need to control this process.
I don't see a moral or ethical problem with selecting the recipient(s) of your eggs, but if you find someone or a couple who seem ideal, who share your values, they will, necessarily, without a doubt, make multiple choices, large and small, throughout the life of their child that you will not agree with or approve of. They will also change as people (and as parents) over time, in ways you might not expect or like. They will pick different parenting battles than you would, and they will give up on things you might insist on. Can you live with that?
posted by Meg_Murry at 7:30 AM on March 15, 2010 [1 favorite]
I don't see a moral or ethical problem with selecting the recipient(s) of your eggs, but if you find someone or a couple who seem ideal, who share your values, they will, necessarily, without a doubt, make multiple choices, large and small, throughout the life of their child that you will not agree with or approve of. They will also change as people (and as parents) over time, in ways you might not expect or like. They will pick different parenting battles than you would, and they will give up on things you might insist on. Can you live with that?
posted by Meg_Murry at 7:30 AM on March 15, 2010 [1 favorite]
Ask yourself this: say you were to find recipients who meet all of your criteria. They're atheists, they share your child-rearing philosophy, they hate reality TV. Whatever your specific concerns are, these potential parents clear your hurdles. Say that you donate your eggs to them, and a child results.
Now imagine that a few years later, when the child is too young really to know what's going on, your recipient parents find Jesus. They embrace a conservative church and begin teaching their child the ways of Christianity. And also, they move to the Jersey shore and pierce the child's ear and take her/him spray tanning. How do you feel now? Do you believe that the kid will turn out okay? If your orange-hued, Jesus-loving genetic offspring grows up and lives by her/his parents values, will you be alright with that?
If not, I'd advise you to destroy any eggs you don't want. Because you can't control how the parents grow and change over time, and you can't control how a child, even a child with your genes, will react to her/his parentage. If that doesn't sit right with you, then this is not the right decision for you.
posted by decathecting at 7:51 AM on March 15, 2010 [1 favorite]
Now imagine that a few years later, when the child is too young really to know what's going on, your recipient parents find Jesus. They embrace a conservative church and begin teaching their child the ways of Christianity. And also, they move to the Jersey shore and pierce the child's ear and take her/him spray tanning. How do you feel now? Do you believe that the kid will turn out okay? If your orange-hued, Jesus-loving genetic offspring grows up and lives by her/his parents values, will you be alright with that?
If not, I'd advise you to destroy any eggs you don't want. Because you can't control how the parents grow and change over time, and you can't control how a child, even a child with your genes, will react to her/his parentage. If that doesn't sit right with you, then this is not the right decision for you.
posted by decathecting at 7:51 AM on March 15, 2010 [1 favorite]
you're donating a person, basically
No, you're donating an egg. An egg contains half the genetic information needed to make an embryo. And it's just part of a package which requires another person's genetic material, a birth mother, the child's upbringing, nutrition, environment, education, not to mention all the dumb luck that goes into making a person.
The thinking that leads to egg=person or sperm=person is precisely the thinking that leads to people bombing 'abortion clinics'.
posted by le morte de bea arthur at 8:05 AM on March 15, 2010 [5 favorites]
No, you're donating an egg. An egg contains half the genetic information needed to make an embryo. And it's just part of a package which requires another person's genetic material, a birth mother, the child's upbringing, nutrition, environment, education, not to mention all the dumb luck that goes into making a person.
The thinking that leads to egg=person or sperm=person is precisely the thinking that leads to people bombing 'abortion clinics'.
posted by le morte de bea arthur at 8:05 AM on March 15, 2010 [5 favorites]
As a mother who has two kids conceived with donor sperm, and one adopted child, I can say that I would really really not want your eggs. One reason we chose anonymous donor sperm (as opposed to a known donor) was that we wanted a really clear legal relationship, and the clarity, for both his sake and ours, that any kids born were ours. A donor who wanted updates and screened us for compatible religious and political views and child-rearing I would have just passed on. It would say to me, "This person just does not get that the baby I'm going to give birth to eventually is my baby and not hers."
Likewise, sometimes a woman placing a baby for adoption will want to reserve certain things to herself: she will specify that she wants a couple who won't re-name the baby, but will keep whatever name she gives it, for instance, or ask for an unusually high level of visitation. These are red flags that she is someone who doesn't think she can care for the baby but isn't really going to understand who its parents are once the adoption happens.
I think it's great that you are open to--or prefer--a single woman or same-sex couple. We only worked with a sperm bank and an adoption agency that would also do these things. And if it is possible for you to specify that you'd prefer to donate to such people, I'm also comfortable with that. But after that, I feel strongly that the right thing to do is walk away and let them get on with their lives.
posted by not that girl at 8:22 AM on March 15, 2010 [2 favorites]
Likewise, sometimes a woman placing a baby for adoption will want to reserve certain things to herself: she will specify that she wants a couple who won't re-name the baby, but will keep whatever name she gives it, for instance, or ask for an unusually high level of visitation. These are red flags that she is someone who doesn't think she can care for the baby but isn't really going to understand who its parents are once the adoption happens.
I think it's great that you are open to--or prefer--a single woman or same-sex couple. We only worked with a sperm bank and an adoption agency that would also do these things. And if it is possible for you to specify that you'd prefer to donate to such people, I'm also comfortable with that. But after that, I feel strongly that the right thing to do is walk away and let them get on with their lives.
posted by not that girl at 8:22 AM on March 15, 2010 [2 favorites]
I really don't think you should donate your eggs at all.
You are thinking of each of your eggs as a mini-you, who will grow up to be just like you if you pick the best parents. You are seeing them as little people already, and of course that means that you are emotionally involved.
Those here who have said how great it is that you want to give your eggs to gay couples or single parents are missing the point. You aren't really willing to completely give them away to anyone. You're projecting so much it hurts to read this. It really does.
Because I sincerely worry that if you did donate your eggs you would end up like some kind of obsessed stalker, wanting to see how the eventual children turned out.
Don't you want to raise your own child to have your (non-religious) values and beliefs? Well, if you give your eggs, you have to accept that the people getting them get to make their own decisions when it comes to raising THEIR children.
Your part in this is done. If you can't walk away now, you aren't ready to be donor.
posted by misha at 8:55 AM on March 15, 2010 [2 favorites]
You are thinking of each of your eggs as a mini-you, who will grow up to be just like you if you pick the best parents. You are seeing them as little people already, and of course that means that you are emotionally involved.
Those here who have said how great it is that you want to give your eggs to gay couples or single parents are missing the point. You aren't really willing to completely give them away to anyone. You're projecting so much it hurts to read this. It really does.
Because I sincerely worry that if you did donate your eggs you would end up like some kind of obsessed stalker, wanting to see how the eventual children turned out.
Don't you want to raise your own child to have your (non-religious) values and beliefs? Well, if you give your eggs, you have to accept that the people getting them get to make their own decisions when it comes to raising THEIR children.
Your part in this is done. If you can't walk away now, you aren't ready to be donor.
posted by misha at 8:55 AM on March 15, 2010 [2 favorites]
I'd prefer to donate to single people or gay couples. [...] I'd like to somehow interview and select them myself, instead of leaving it in the hands of a fertility clinic who might give my precious eggs to a person/couple whose values I strongly disagree with
Is there a specific reason you would not want your eggs to go to a hetero couple in love whose values you agree with? These are your eggs, and your choice, but this seems (without knowing your reasoning, and I'm willing to be enlightened) to be a bit of prejudice that, to be frank, sounds like something I would NOT want to carry on into a future generation.
posted by swimming naked when the tide goes out at 9:38 AM on March 15, 2010
Is there a specific reason you would not want your eggs to go to a hetero couple in love whose values you agree with? These are your eggs, and your choice, but this seems (without knowing your reasoning, and I'm willing to be enlightened) to be a bit of prejudice that, to be frank, sounds like something I would NOT want to carry on into a future generation.
posted by swimming naked when the tide goes out at 9:38 AM on March 15, 2010
heytch, I hear you - I've been there and this is a difficult dilemma.
My (same-sex) wife and I got pregnant using anonymous donor sperm via IVF. I was - and still am - so grateful that there were people out there who willingly gave away their genetics - without conditions - so that we could become parents. I also had a very good response to IVF and produced a large number of follicles/harvestable eggs, and I also thought about whether to donate the unused embryos or other eggs in the future. I felt that since others had done such a wonderful, noble thing so that we could get pregnant, I should pass it forward, so to speak.
But I couldn't. I couldn't stomach the thought that there would be a part of me out there that I would never see, never get to know. I couldn't stand the thought that this part of me might be raised by someone who could possibly beat the child or sexually abuse them or any of the horrible things you can imagine. (I believe this is extremely unlikely, especially after someone has jumped through all the hurdles to actually go through IVF with a donated egg, but rational thinking and babies do not always go hand in hand.)
So in the end, I wasn't able to reciprocate that way. I had to recognize my limitations and realize that donating my eggs would make me miserably unhappy. I sincerely applaud all those who are able to do it, though - I truly believe it's the most selfless and life-altering thing anyone can ever do for another.
I really commend you for the desire to donate but have to concur with the other posters that unless you can do so and happily walk away from any control of the situation, then, sadly, it isn't for you.
Congrats on the pregnancy!
posted by widdershins at 9:55 AM on March 15, 2010 [2 favorites]
My (same-sex) wife and I got pregnant using anonymous donor sperm via IVF. I was - and still am - so grateful that there were people out there who willingly gave away their genetics - without conditions - so that we could become parents. I also had a very good response to IVF and produced a large number of follicles/harvestable eggs, and I also thought about whether to donate the unused embryos or other eggs in the future. I felt that since others had done such a wonderful, noble thing so that we could get pregnant, I should pass it forward, so to speak.
But I couldn't. I couldn't stomach the thought that there would be a part of me out there that I would never see, never get to know. I couldn't stand the thought that this part of me might be raised by someone who could possibly beat the child or sexually abuse them or any of the horrible things you can imagine. (I believe this is extremely unlikely, especially after someone has jumped through all the hurdles to actually go through IVF with a donated egg, but rational thinking and babies do not always go hand in hand.)
So in the end, I wasn't able to reciprocate that way. I had to recognize my limitations and realize that donating my eggs would make me miserably unhappy. I sincerely applaud all those who are able to do it, though - I truly believe it's the most selfless and life-altering thing anyone can ever do for another.
I really commend you for the desire to donate but have to concur with the other posters that unless you can do so and happily walk away from any control of the situation, then, sadly, it isn't for you.
Congrats on the pregnancy!
posted by widdershins at 9:55 AM on March 15, 2010 [2 favorites]
To add my voice to the mix - I think it's a wonderful idea. To take a slightly different twist on all the objections that you are 'micro-managing' by wanting to stay in contact, what a great piece of information that is to the child. You hear so many stories of adopted children trying to find their biological parents for various reasons. I think it would be nice for you to be available to provide the appropriate medical history and answer various questions as they come up. Think - favorite aunt who lives in another country, not annoying busybody.
Your eggs are yours - I think they should go to whomever you would feel comfortable with giving them to. This isn't a question of being fair or politically correct. It doesn't matter what other people think - they're going to grow up to be little people and all you can do is try to arrange things to the best of your ability.
posted by valoius at 10:07 AM on March 15, 2010
Your eggs are yours - I think they should go to whomever you would feel comfortable with giving them to. This isn't a question of being fair or politically correct. It doesn't matter what other people think - they're going to grow up to be little people and all you can do is try to arrange things to the best of your ability.
posted by valoius at 10:07 AM on March 15, 2010
There are people for whom this arrangement would be preferable. There are so many ways that kids are conceived. Surrogates, egg donors, sperm donors, adoption, fostering, etc. Some people want the option for the kid to have some ability to contact the genetic donor. The extent of this varies. As bunnycup explains above, everything in the world of conception is controlled in so many ways. Gay folks and single women have the hardest time, and trying to find a way to donate to someone in need could be mutually beneficial for you both.
However, I am assuming you meant "control this process" in terms of desiring to help those who need it the most, not that you want to keep a tight fist around the kids or her parents for the rest of her life.
I know lots of people who send updates to known donors on the kid's life. And that's for those who aren't already friendly with their donors. There are ways to do this, with varying levels of contact or not.
posted by barnone at 11:14 AM on March 15, 2010
However, I am assuming you meant "control this process" in terms of desiring to help those who need it the most, not that you want to keep a tight fist around the kids or her parents for the rest of her life.
I know lots of people who send updates to known donors on the kid's life. And that's for those who aren't already friendly with their donors. There are ways to do this, with varying levels of contact or not.
posted by barnone at 11:14 AM on March 15, 2010
I think it's morally defensible for you to be as picky as you could/would be in an open adoption.
posted by Jacqueline at 1:20 PM on March 15, 2010
posted by Jacqueline at 1:20 PM on March 15, 2010
you're donating a person, basically
The thinking that leads to egg=person or sperm=person is precisely the thinking that leads to people bombing 'abortion clinics'.
Although I understand where you're coming from on that, and I expected someone to say what you said, I still have to disagree vehemently with your thinking on that, since I'm the one you're quoting and yet I've been pro-choice my whole life.
That egg that she would be donating contains her genetic material, and she would be donating it for the express purpose of creating a person. Of course we know that not every egg will end up fertilized and ultimately becoming a person, but that's the end goal here. It's not a discussion of "when does life begin?" So it's a slightly different situation.
What probably motivates my thinking here is thinking about my own daughter, and how unhappy she would have been had she been raised by a different family with opposite values. Because genes do play a part in the way you think, and it's precisely the "child's upbringing, nutrition, environment, education" that I was concerned with. My daughter, who is now grown, actually has very similar feelings about things as I do, in spite of her best efforts to rebel. :) So if she had been made to grow up in a family with opposite values, she most likely would have been miserable.
posted by MexicanYenta at 1:45 PM on March 15, 2010
The thinking that leads to egg=person or sperm=person is precisely the thinking that leads to people bombing 'abortion clinics'.
Although I understand where you're coming from on that, and I expected someone to say what you said, I still have to disagree vehemently with your thinking on that, since I'm the one you're quoting and yet I've been pro-choice my whole life.
That egg that she would be donating contains her genetic material, and she would be donating it for the express purpose of creating a person. Of course we know that not every egg will end up fertilized and ultimately becoming a person, but that's the end goal here. It's not a discussion of "when does life begin?" So it's a slightly different situation.
What probably motivates my thinking here is thinking about my own daughter, and how unhappy she would have been had she been raised by a different family with opposite values. Because genes do play a part in the way you think, and it's precisely the "child's upbringing, nutrition, environment, education" that I was concerned with. My daughter, who is now grown, actually has very similar feelings about things as I do, in spite of her best efforts to rebel. :) So if she had been made to grow up in a family with opposite values, she most likely would have been miserable.
posted by MexicanYenta at 1:45 PM on March 15, 2010
What probably motivates my thinking here is thinking about my own daughter, and how unhappy she would have been had she been raised by a different family with opposite values.
Your daughter has been raised by you and, by the sound of it, in a loving environment. It's hardly surprising that you and she have such similarities. However, had she been conceived with a different set of paternal genetic material she'd almost certainly be a somewhat different person. People might see those two people and guess that they're half-sisters, but that's about it. Even if she'd been adopted from you at birth, there's a good chance her parent could have raised a healthy, happy child with quite different values from the ones you hold so dear. Nurture counts for a lot.
There's simply no way of telling how that quite different person, brought up by loving parents of whatever genders or orientations, of whatever political or religious views, might turn out, just based on your contribution to her genes. A human egg cell isn't a template for a copy of the adult you, along with all your notions of what's right or wrong.
posted by le morte de bea arthur at 2:26 PM on March 15, 2010 [1 favorite]
Your daughter has been raised by you and, by the sound of it, in a loving environment. It's hardly surprising that you and she have such similarities. However, had she been conceived with a different set of paternal genetic material she'd almost certainly be a somewhat different person. People might see those two people and guess that they're half-sisters, but that's about it. Even if she'd been adopted from you at birth, there's a good chance her parent could have raised a healthy, happy child with quite different values from the ones you hold so dear. Nurture counts for a lot.
There's simply no way of telling how that quite different person, brought up by loving parents of whatever genders or orientations, of whatever political or religious views, might turn out, just based on your contribution to her genes. A human egg cell isn't a template for a copy of the adult you, along with all your notions of what's right or wrong.
posted by le morte de bea arthur at 2:26 PM on March 15, 2010 [1 favorite]
My apologies(!) for not knowing that eggs could be frozen effectively these days. This seems to be something that is relatively new. In fact, since we did ivf... which was only two years ago.from here It does lower the success rate it seems.
As someone who faced the possibility of needing donated eggs (but ultimately didn't need them) I wouldn't want to have eggs that came with such strings attached. I'd have wanted to know your health, maybe your iq and contact details for in 18 years time in case the sprog wanted to find you.
As someone else mentioned above about their friend... anything else, not even just the regular contact thing.... would have made me think it was babysitting. I'd expect you'd want to know our ages, our reason for infertility and maybe our employment/financial stability. I agree that once you give your eggs, it's a gift and you need to let go of all control. I would not want any more details about or for an unknown donor. A known donor would have been a different kettle of fish. That would have been an "aunty" situation, for sure. We considered both.
posted by taff at 3:05 PM on March 15, 2010
As someone who faced the possibility of needing donated eggs (but ultimately didn't need them) I wouldn't want to have eggs that came with such strings attached. I'd have wanted to know your health, maybe your iq and contact details for in 18 years time in case the sprog wanted to find you.
As someone else mentioned above about their friend... anything else, not even just the regular contact thing.... would have made me think it was babysitting. I'd expect you'd want to know our ages, our reason for infertility and maybe our employment/financial stability. I agree that once you give your eggs, it's a gift and you need to let go of all control. I would not want any more details about or for an unknown donor. A known donor would have been a different kettle of fish. That would have been an "aunty" situation, for sure. We considered both.
posted by taff at 3:05 PM on March 15, 2010
I logged in just to reiterate what floam said. You've got a chance here to prevent the production of one or more additional humans. The Earth has an enormous surplus of humans, and an increasing deficit of a number of resources?
What would I do? Defrost those eggs and pat myself on the back.
posted by dbarefoot at 6:50 PM on March 15, 2010 [1 favorite]
What would I do? Defrost those eggs and pat myself on the back.
posted by dbarefoot at 6:50 PM on March 15, 2010 [1 favorite]
OP I think you are unclear on the concept of "donate."
This is true enough in that one she donates she no longer has any control over how the recipients bring up their child. In regards to her actual question though, there's nothing wrong with choosing who she donates to. She can decide where to donate her time, and her money, and her old clothes, and it's just as reasonable for her to decide to whom she donates her eggs.
I think the best suggestion by far is to approach a group that fits your criteria (GLBT group in your area, for example) and speak to someone about this to see if they know anyone who would be interested. I imagine this would work out even better for you, as you may have a chance (though it is entirely the parents' choice) that they include you in parts of their child's life.
posted by twirlypen at 8:56 PM on March 15, 2010
This is true enough in that one she donates she no longer has any control over how the recipients bring up their child. In regards to her actual question though, there's nothing wrong with choosing who she donates to. She can decide where to donate her time, and her money, and her old clothes, and it's just as reasonable for her to decide to whom she donates her eggs.
I think the best suggestion by far is to approach a group that fits your criteria (GLBT group in your area, for example) and speak to someone about this to see if they know anyone who would be interested. I imagine this would work out even better for you, as you may have a chance (though it is entirely the parents' choice) that they include you in parts of their child's life.
posted by twirlypen at 8:56 PM on March 15, 2010
Something about this question really caught my attention and I've been mulling this. I think I've figured out what bothers/intrigues me about it--I don't think that "values" necessarily should or can mean concrete political or religious beliefs, or specific social choices in this context. I was raised by politically conservative Evangelical Christians who let me watch lousy TV shows; a good friend of mine was raised by liberal Catholics who taught her to think of dried fruit as dessert. Despite those cultural or social differences, I think that our parents have similar values. We were both loved, encouraged, and held accountable. We both grew up knowing that our parents wanted the absolute best for us, we were both given lots of opportunities to learn in and out of school, and we both felt safe to be ourselves. And we've both turned out fine as adults--neither of us shares our parents' religious beliefs, and I don't share my parents' political beliefs, but we both have strong positive relationships with our parents.
I've known both atheist and religious people who were mean, selfish, lazy, or neglectful parents. Likewise, I've known people who teach their kids to be environmentally conscious in good, loving, generous ways and people who do so in hard, punishing ways. I used to consider it a problem specific to Christianity that some of my peers were raised to believe that non-Christian parents couldn't raise happy, healthy kids (because they didn't "raise up the child in the way he should go"), but now I think it's just human nature to think that way--that one's own culture and social choices create the best parenting--and it's wrong.
So, while I don't think there's anything at all wrong with aiming for a person or family who align with your political and social beliefs, I don't think that you ensure a happy childhood for your genetic offspring by doing so.
posted by Meg_Murry at 8:32 AM on March 16, 2010 [2 favorites]
I've known both atheist and religious people who were mean, selfish, lazy, or neglectful parents. Likewise, I've known people who teach their kids to be environmentally conscious in good, loving, generous ways and people who do so in hard, punishing ways. I used to consider it a problem specific to Christianity that some of my peers were raised to believe that non-Christian parents couldn't raise happy, healthy kids (because they didn't "raise up the child in the way he should go"), but now I think it's just human nature to think that way--that one's own culture and social choices create the best parenting--and it's wrong.
So, while I don't think there's anything at all wrong with aiming for a person or family who align with your political and social beliefs, I don't think that you ensure a happy childhood for your genetic offspring by doing so.
posted by Meg_Murry at 8:32 AM on March 16, 2010 [2 favorites]
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by orthogonality at 1:39 AM on March 15, 2010