Another difficulty sperm donor offspring suffer is the secrecy about their origins. In most cases, parents let the child believe that he or she is biologically related to both of them in the beginning. Then, when the child finally discovers the truth, the child feels lied to and the parent-child relationship is strained. This leaves a legacy of distrust, with 47% of them declaring that their mother might have lied about important matters when they were growing up. This compares with 27% for those who were adopted and 18% for those who were raised by their biological parents. Similar results were given for worrying that their father might have lied.
Not surprisingly, a substantial majority of adults conceived through sperm donation expressed support for their right to know everything. This included the identity of the donor and the right to have some kind of relationship with him. They also said they wanted to know about the existence and number of their half-siblings. As it now stands, the law in the United States does not give them any of these rights. In fact, it protects the donors and fertility clinics at the cost of the children conceived.
But the problems do not end with secrecy. The survey results showed that 44% of the donor-conceived adults were comfortable with donor conception so long as parents tell their children the truth, preferably from an early age. Nevertheless, 36% had concerns about it even if parents told the truth, and 11% said it is hard for kids even if parents handle the issue well.
In fact, the report commented that: “openness alone does not appear to resolve the potential losses, confusion and risks that can come with deliberately conceiving children so that they will be raised lacking at least one of their biological parents.”
The report concluded with a series of recommendations. Among them was the observation that no other medical procedure has such enormous implications for a person who did not seek the treatment — the offspring. And they asked: “Does a good society intentionally create children in this way?” A question well worth reflecting on.
Yet another marker of God’s wisdom in establishing marriage of a man and a woman as the proper and correct course to have children – and another marker of our disobedience.
I have read that a person’s personality can be attributed 50% to DNA and 50% to his culture of maturation. One recent study stated that that the proportions are 60% DNA and 40% culture of maturation.
This argues in favor of those whose DNA is derived from sperm/egg donors and also adoptees having free access to information that is being withheld regarding their DNA origins.
Elves, please correct the last part of the first sentence of my comment to read,
“…and 50% to his culture of maturation.”
The same outrage can be expressed against adoption. Fortunately adoption is favored by the Church. What a hack-job of an article.
Every child has the right to begin life with a mommy and a daddy. Denying that birthright is child abuse. Sperm donation, artificial insemination, and surrogate pregnancy should not be available except where a man and woman in a household are ready and willing to be the parents.
Mark Brown
San Angelo, Texas
June 15, 2010
I see no reason why the child should ever learn he is not the natural child of both parents. The question need never arise.