Update

Wow, it's been a REALLY long time since I've posted on here. A lot has happened.

The short version is that after taking the 23andMe DNA test, I found a first cousin who was able to help me piece together than her uncle is my bio-father. As soon as she said his name, I recognized him from all of the hours of research I'd done into men who were at UTSW Dallas in 1976.

He and I have developed a virtual relationship over the last year. We've never met, never talked on the phone, but we message each other regularly. We are so very different in the areas of religion and politics but we genuinely like each other and I am so thankful to God that He allowed me to find him.

For My Dad

My dad died two weeks ago.

His health had been declining due to PSP for about seven years. My mother called me on a Thursday to tell me that my dad wasn’t doing well and on Friday she called back to say that we probably ought to come see him, that it wouldn’t be long before he would pass away. We got there on Saturday and he was in that coma-like state that often precedes death. He lived until the following Saturday, never waking up and only opening one eye once, a few hours after I got there.

The night before the funeral, my husband sat down with my mom and asked her some questions about my dad in preparation for officiating my dad’s funeral. My mom told my husband about the time that my dad saved my grandmother, his mother-in-law from drowning when no one else saw her go underwater and not come back up. My grandmother came to see my dad the morning before he died, and thanked him again for saving her more than four decades earlier.

Mom told him about how my dad worked until late into the evening shortly after they were married, but one night didn’t come home. So after waiting for him for a couple of hours, she walked down the street to a store to a pay phone to call her father-in-law to tell him that my dad was missing. As she was on the phone, she saw my dad drive by. Once she got back home, he explained that he had stopped to help a man on the side of the road who had run out of gas. My mom was worried sick, but my dad was just helping a stranger out. He did things like that often over the years.

We told my husband about driving through Oregon when I was about 10. We came upon a man who had just had a motor cycle accident on a two lane road in the middle of nowhere and so we stopped to pick him up and take him to the nearest hospital, even though we were on a vacation.

I remember hearing about how, shortly after moving to Tennessee from Dallas, my dad was nearly run over on the street outside his office building because he was walking with a black woman to go get lunch. I suppose the driver thought that my dad and his coworker were a couple and wanted to convey that that sort of thing wasn’t tolerated in this city.

I remember realizing that there were certain derogatory words that were suddenly part of the everyday speech that I heard in our new town that I had never heard at home, and I was proud that I’d never heard those words come from my parent’s lips.

My dad taught me right from wrong; there were morals to live by and you always did the right thing, even if no one was watching because integrity was important.

I remember how protective my dad was of me; he knew how the world operated and he wanted to keep me as safe as possible from harm. I thought of it as smothering, but I also knew that he loved me. I was glad for his rules, even as a kid.

When I was about 17, I was invited to go take a ride with a friend and her boyfriend. I did NOT want to do this because I didn’t trust their driving skills, so I told them I’d have to ask my dad, certain that he would tell me no. He told me I could go, much to my chagrin. Later, I told him that I really wanted him to tell me no so that I could use him as an excuse to stay out of a dangerous situation. I think I really shocked him! He told me that if I were in that situation again, I was free to say that my dad wouldn’t want me to do whatever it was that I didn’t want to do, so that he wouldn’t give me the wrong answer again!

I remember a conversation in the car when he told me how much he loved my mom. He would come home from work around the time that she would start cooking, and would put his arms around her and kiss her neck while she cooked. My sister and I would make gagging noises, but I secretly loved to see him show her affection.

I also remember having The Talk with my mom when I first learned about sex, but a couple of years later, I got The Talk again from my dad, who wanted me to know how boys thought, and not just how their bodies work. I still laugh when I think about how uncomfortable he was with that brief monologue.

We had another Talk during my early teen years about God. I remember thinking that this particular talk must be as difficult and uncomfortable for him as The Other Talk was. I think he felt like he needed to talk to me about God, even though he didn’t go to church.

When I was about 17, he started going to church with my mom, sister, and me. We never really talked about God much, even then. But he was proud of me when I decided to go to a local Christian liberal arts college. I became a Christian during my freshman year, and began to get involved in Bible studies and fell in love with theology. My mom told me the night before the funeral that my dad was impressed with how I studied Scripture. I never knew that Ihad made an impression on him!

I’m not sure what he thought when I moved back to Dallas at 20 years old to marry a boy who was a youth minister. My mom said that he cried when I left home. But he gave my husband his blessing when asked for my hand in marriage.

My children will have no memories of my dad when he wasn’t using a walker or bed-ridden. My youngest two may have no memories of him at all as they get older. But when they are older, I’ll remind them of how, just a few weeks before he died, they sat on his bed feeding him M&Ms. And when I hear Unchained Melody, I’ll tell them how much he loved that song. And one day, when I get my dad’s Bible, I’ll show them the leather Bible cover that he made and tooled by hand. I’ll show them the craftsmanship and the intricate designs that he chiseled into the leather with no pattern to follow. I’ll tell them how talented he was and how his dad taught him to tool saddles in west Texas.

They’ll know how much my dad loved Texas because of the Texas soil that I have in a little glass bottle…a little portion of the soil that each of us sprinkled onto my dad’s vault after he was lowered into the ground.

But mostly, I’ll tell them how much he loved each of them. And I’ll tell them how much I loved him.

The Term “Flip-Flop” Comes To Mind…

Every month like clockwork my body produces an egg. Most of them, all but two, have been flushed through my reproductive system and out again with my monthly cycle. Producing eggs doesn’t make me a mother. It just means I have ovaries that function normally.

You know what I find amazingly illogical and yet somewhat amusing? Our culture, which has bought into the idea that science is the ultimate authority, that only empirical data can guide us, can so cleanly sweep all of that away by claiming that love is the glue that makes a family. Science is god until that god fails to uphold whatever issue is at stake; then emotion becomes god.

Come on, all of you who tell me that I’m foolish to look to the God of Scripture, who never changes, for my standard of right and wrong…where is your consistency?

You want to cling to science for all you’re worth when it comes to philosophy of life. But when biology tells one story, we turn to emotion to write another story. You refuse to believe in something other than what can be measured in a laboratory by using the scientific method. But when the empirical evidence is weighed against you, you turn to feelings and emotions to make your case.

You say that a parent is the one who raises a child and that a sperm or egg “donor” is not a parent, but that flies in the face of science and empirical data. Your god betrays you when DNA concludes that a “donor” is indeed a parent. So you turn to emotion and reject biology.

So get offended all you want, Sierras of the world. Your denial and anger don’t change biology.

More Anonymous Father's Day Information

Please check out these links and tell your friends!
https://prescreen.com/movie/Anonymous-Fathers-Day (TODAY -Monday 11/21- ONLY, you can spend $4 to watch AFD streaming online for the next 59 days; after today, the price will be $8)

https://www.facebook.com/?ref=tn_tnmn#!/AnonFathersDay This is the AFD facebook page.

http://www.anonymousfathersday.com/ This is the official homepage for AFD

http://twitter.com/#!/AnonFathersDay on Twitter

Official Anonymous Father's Day Trailer!

This is the official trailer for the new film that I am privileged to be part of! I'm the first chick in blue.

Timing is Everything

Karen posted a link here to go to Anderson Cooper’s clip about babies being sold to the highest bidder. I watched that video this morning, and wondered about the outrage that these people in the clip showed.

I didn’t wonder about their outrage because I thought they were over-reacting.

I wondered about it because when you get down to it, there’s only one thing that differentiates this situation from a typical surrogacy situation – the time line.

In a typical situation, the intended parents pick out the egg, pick out the sperm, and pick out the woman who will carry the baby, then the woman gets pregnant, has the baby, and everyone is happy.

In this case, the intended parents come in at the end.

So it’s a matter of timing.

I do think that this is a terrible situation, but aside from the fact that this is illegal while it’s perfectly legal to rearrange the order of events, why are people getting their panties in a wad? If any of them thought this through logically, they would see that their anger and disgust should be directed at the entire industry that profits from the commodification of people, no matter when the intended parents come into the picture.

Come on, people, don’t let a timeline dictate how you see what is right and wrong!

Originally posted here: http://familyscholars.org/2011/10/25/timing-is-everything/

Anonymous Father's Day

Last Friday, I was interviewed for Jennifer Lahl's new film, Anonymous Father's Day. This was my first time being filmed, unless you count Christmas mornings, and I was very honored to take part in this project. You can see a video preview here:

http://donorchild.blogspot.com/2011/06/teaser-of-jennifer-lahls-new-film.html

A Teaser of Jennifer Lahl's New Film

UPDATE: Please click here to see the "official" trailer of Anonymous Father's Day!

State Medical Licensing

Here's a great resources for donor conceived people to find their biological fathers IF their father was a med student or resident. This is a list of state medical boards, where you can purchase databanks of every doctor who was licensed in a particular state. I have not gone through every state to see what is offered, but I know that a sortable database is offered for purchase for the state of Texas.


Getting closer!!

The Scandel of Bioethics

I am so excited to share the news that Elizabeth Marquardt and I will be speaking at The Scandal of Bioethics: Reclaiming Christian Influence in Technology, Science, & Medicine, a bioethics conference in Chicago in July.  I am looking forward to this incredible opportunity!

Update:

The conference went really well, and we were well received. I truly enjoyed taking part in presenting our paper, even though I was very nervous!

Dear Atlanta

One of the great things about the feedjit thing-a-mabob at the bottom of this blog is that I can see how people get to my blog.  Often times, I laugh at the keywords that bring people here, because this is NOT what they are looking for.  On occasion, I'm shocked at what people are searching for, and I'm glad that they landed here, because they need a little sunshine in their dark search. 

Sometimes I can see that people hit my blog because it might be exactly what they need.  And then I pray for them.

So "Atlanta", just in case you hit my page one more time, know that I'm praying for you.

Family Finder

I mentioned a while back that I have done a couple of DNA tests.  The first was with my mother; in the future, if I am able to have a test with someone (siblingship test or paternity test) it seems to be helpful to have the mother's DNA, if possible. 

The second one I did is called Family Finder.  Family Tree DNA does this test (and other DNA tests) and takes the results and enters them into their data bank to check against other participants.  I am still learning about this site and what all it offers, but I've gotta tell you that I'm really impressed with it.  I've gotten 160+ matches and the list is growing.  I haven't found anyone closer than a 3rd cousin yet, but I'm very hopeful. 

Throughout this crazy journey of being donor conceived, God has sent several people to help me with whatever it was that I needed at the time; emotional support, a direction to look, ideas on looking, financial gifts to pay for DNA tests, etc.  The people that I've met have been wonderful folks that I wouldn't have known otherwise.  I'm thankful to God for sending these people into my life. 

The latest person is a man named Brian, whose father has shown up on my list of relatives as a distant cousin.  Brian was able to read the proverbial writing on the Family Finder wall for me; my biological father is Jewish.  I was both surprised and thrilled with this knowledge. 

It feels so good to know something about this man who helped create me, but it is also wonderful to know this about myself; I have a history.  I have a people.  I was not raised Jewish, but I guess you could say that it's in my blood.

Brian also did a little digging for me about my mother's family, too, and I was surprised to find out interesting things about that line.

Even though this isn't a commerical for FTDNA, it's going to sound like it...if you are interested in genealogy, do this Family Finder test.  If you want to find your biological family, this is a good place to start.  If you just want to find people you share ancestors with, do this.  I can't recommend it enough, and I don't even fully know everything that this site does yet!  There are all kinds of cool tools that can be used to reconstruct a family tree.

So to Brian who helped me more than he knows, and to the one who made it possible for me to take this test, thank you. 

A Brief History of AI

(This can be found at FamilyScholars)

The following two articles come from Bill Cordray, who is a donor conceived adult in the U.S. who has spoken and written about donor insemination issues for years. He posted this letter some months back to the PCVAI (people conceived via artificial insemination) yahoo group, which can be found here. The first article is from The Medical World, and the second article is an excerpt from a paper that Bill wrote for a class in Reproductive Issues in the Philosophy Department at the University of Utah. I am posting these two articles here, with Bill’s permission.

I thought it was important to post this letter in its entirety.
The Medical World, April 1909 pp. 163-164: Letter to the Editor
Artificial Impregnation

Editor Medical World:

It has been twenty-five years since Professor Pancoast performed the first artificial impregnation of a woman, in the Sansom Street hospital of Jefferson Medical College, in Philadelphia. At that time the procedure was so novel, so peculiar in its human ethics, that the six young men of the senior class who witnest [witnessed?] the operation were pledged to absolute secrecy. The circumstances of the case were about as follows:

A wealthy merchant of Philadelphia consulted Professor Pancoast to learn why his home was childless. The man was forty-one years of age, of sound body as far as he knew, had a good family history, and had never suffered from any serious illness in his life, barring a slight attack of gonorrhea in his youth, while sowing the proverbial "wild oats."

His wife was ten years his junior, a perfect picture of health, and a product one of the old Quaker families of wealth and distinction in Quakerville.

An appointment was made with the both for an examination at the Sansom Street hospital, and a section of the senior class, of which I was one, was called upon to assist the Professor. The supposition on the part of the Professor was that the woman was unable to conceive because of some impediment which possibly might be removed. Therefore, she was examined first. The examination was very complete, almost as perfect as an army examination, but not the slightest abnormal condition was discovered. As a matter of possible public interest, I will say that during this examination was discovered for the first time, as far as I know, the suction function of the uterus, which takes place during orgasm.

The man was then examined; and while no physical defect was discoverable, the spermatic fluid was shown by the microscopic examination to be absolutely void of spermatozoons. This, of course, cleared up the situation at once, and the man was informed that the fault was his, and probably due to results of the gonorrhea in his youth. Professor Pancoast at that time considered the trouble as easily remedied, and began a course of treatment which he thought proper.

But after two months' careful attention, the man showed no change whatever, and the Professor then concluded that the primary seminal ducts were occluded by the former inflammation extending upward from the urethra. A joking remark by one the class, "the only solution of this problem is to call in the hired man," was the probable incentive to the plan of action which followed. The woman was chloroformed, and with a hard rubber syringe some fresh semen from the best-looking member of the class was deposited in the uterus, and the cervix slightly plugged with gauze. Neither the man nor the woman knew the nature of what had been done at the time, but subsequently the Professor repented of his action, and explained the whole matter to the husband. Strange as it may seem, the man was delighted with the idea, and conspired with the Professor in keeping from the lady the actual way by which her impregnation was brought about. In due course of time the lady gave birth to a son, and he had characteristics features, not of the senior student, but of the willing but impossible father.

That boy is now a business man of the city of New York, and I have shaken his hands with him within the past year.

Since then there has been formed an association for the purpose of producing artificial impregnation of women who may for any reason give a written consent to such a proceeding. From a nature point of view the idea of artificial impregnation offers valuable advantages. The mating of human beings must, from the nature of things, be a matter of sentiment alone. Persons of the worst possible promise of good and healthy offspring are being lawfully united in marriage everyday. Marriage is a proposition which is not submitted to good judgment or even common sense, as a rule. No Burbank methods are possible, even tho they be ideal. Artificial impregnation by carefully selected seed, alone will solve the problem. It may at first shock the delicate sensibilities of the sentimental who consider that the source of the seed indicates the true father, but when the scientific fact becomes known that the origin of the spermatozoa which generates the ovum is of no more importance that the personality of the finger which pulls the trigger of a gun, then objections will lose their forcefulness, and artificial impregnation become recognized as a race-uplifting procedure.

It is gradually becoming well established that the mother is the complete builder of the child. It is her blood that gives it material for its body, and her nerve energy which is divided to supply its vital force. It is her mental ideals which go to influence, to some extent at least, the features, the tendencies, and the mental caliber of the child. "Many a man rocks another man's child and thinks he is rocking his own," for it looks like him. And often two children by the same parents have feature entirely dissimilar. It is the predominating mental ideals prevailing with the mother that shapes the destiny of the child. The man who thrusts his nose into a beautiful blossom to surfeit his sense of smell on the sweet perfume is merely breathing the lustful odor from the sexual organ of the plant; and if his nose displaces some of the pollen, he may be the father of the next flower. If a honey bee does the work, it might be called the father.

A scientific study of sex selection, without regard to marriage conditions, might result in giving some men children of wonderful endowments, in place of half-witted, evil-inclined, disease-disposed offspring which they are ashamed to call their own. The mechanical method of impregnation, whether it be the orthodox way, or the aseptic surgeon's skillful fingers, counts but little, except sentiment, and sentiment is fast becoming a servant instead of a master in the affairs of the human race. Few are the children that are brought intentionally into this world. As a rule they are but the incidental result of a journey in search of selfish pleasure. They are seldom sought, and often unwelcome when they pout in their first appearance. The subsequent mother's love is largely a matter of growth, for affection is but an attribute of selfishness.

The man who may think this idea shocking probably has millions of gonococci swarming in his seminal ducts, and probably his wife has had a laparotomy which nearly cost her life itself, as a result of his infecting her with the crop reaped from his last planting of "wild oats." One man in every five in New York City was found to be free from the contamination of venereal disease to an extant that rendered him safe ["unsafe?"] around the house in which a woman lived.

Go ask the blind children whose eyes were saturated with the gonorrheal pus as they struggled thru the birth canal to merge into this world of darkness to endure a living death; ask them what is the not shocking thing in this whole world. Ask Helen Keller what is the most shocking thing in this sin-soaked ball of selfish pursuits. They will tell you it is the idea that man, wonderful man, is infecting 80 percent of all womankind with the satanic germs collected by him as his youthful steps wandered in the "bad lands." A. D. Hard, M.D., Marshall, Minn. [I think his first name is Addison]

******************************************************
Bio of Professor Pancoast:
His son, William Henry, surgeon, born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 16 October, 1835, was graduated at the Jefferson medical college in 1856, studied for three years in London, Paris, and Vienna, and on his return established himself in practice in Philadelphia, and acquired a high reputation as a bold, rapid, and skilful operative surgeon, conservative in treatment and seldom mistaken in diagnosis. During the civil war he served as a surgeon in the army. In 1874 he succeeded his father as professor in Jefferson medical college. In 1884 he secured the bodies of the Siamese twins, and proved that the band could not have been safely cut except in their childhood. He became professor of the Philadelphia medico-chirurgical college in 1886.


Bill’s paper:

Why did anonymous fathers become an inherent ingredient in donor insemination, the oldest form of assisted reproductive technology? From the start, at least as far as we can tell from the first purported use of donor insemination in 1884 by Dr. William Pancoast (The Medical World, April 1909 pp. 163-164: Letter to the Editor), it appears that one of his unknown medical students, jokingly called the “Hired Hand,” was used in order to deceive the wife about the process and to encourage her to believe that her husband was the father. There was no informed consent and the husband was told only after the wife became pregnant. Professor Pancoast then set up an “association for the purpose of producing artificial impregnation of women who may for any reason give a written consent to such a proceeding.” [ibid. Medical World]. It is implied that the business of donor insemination then began and followed informed consent but nothing is said about anonymity. The inference from this article is that the “impregnator” is not significant since the mother is the “is the complete builder of the child.” The writer then goes on to add that “the origin of the spermatozoa,,, is of no more importance that the personality of the finger which pulls the trigger of a gun… (and therefore)… artificial impregnation [should] become recognized as a race-uplifting procedure.” [Cite Medical World]. From the attitude of the letter writer it seems clear that he advocates the use of artificial insemination using “carefully selected seed.” In other words, this first use of DI is touted as a way for society to become the “master in the affairs of the human race.” As reported in an article called “The Impregnators” in “Fertility and Sterility” (A. T. Gregoire, PhD and Robert C. Mayer, MD; F&S vol.16, no. 6, 1965, p. 130 - 134) the 1909 letter caused a debate between those who felt DI violated the laws of God, “ridiculously criminal,” “neither honest nor moral,” to those who support the eugenic idea that artificial impregnation “could improve the genetic stock of America.” The moral criticisms of the act were dismissed “since the question of morals belonged in the theological journal, not a scientific publication.” “Doctors have enough of the laws of God when they are young…” and “without disrespect to Nature and Nature’s God, they (doctors) modify creation and improve it with intelligence.” After this brief uproar the practice went underground so that we know very little about the early years of donor insemination. Discussion of artificial reproduction appeared in various journals and lectures as early as 1910 (Hermann Muller) and even in literature such as Buck Mulligan’s proposal for a “fertilising farm to be named Omphalos with an obelisk” erected (phallic pun intended by Joyce) in the “Oxen of the Sun” episode of Ulysses (1922; 14: lines 651 to 737) as well as in Huxley’s Brave New World (1932). Actual mention of DI as a current practice is rarely mentioned, although we can’t assume that it didn’t continue. If it was practiced, then it survived under a cloak of secrecy reinforced with instructions to recipients to refrain from telling their children.

Excerpts from various early guides for fertility often stress that the identity of the donors must obviously remain anonymous. For example, W. J. Finegold wrote (Artificial Insemination; Springfield Illinois, Charles C. Thomas; 1964) that “the donors should be veiled in absolute obscurity.” M. Glezerman (‘Two hundred and seventy cases of artificial donor insemination,’ Fertility and Sterility 1981:35:180-7) wrote “the donor semen should be regarded as ‘material from an anonymous testis’” and that the genetic father is actually a “non-person.” Although 1982 marked the first break from anonymous donors through The Sperm Bank of California, a nonprofit feminist clinic, Sherman Silber (How To Get Pregnant; Little, Brown and Company; 2005, p. 415) wrote that “the majority of physicians still oppose identity release donors, with the (unsubstantiated) claim that the vast majority of couples prefer anonymous sperm.”

Yes, I'm still alive

There's not much going on lately in regards to my search for my genetic father.  I've taken a DNA test with my mom and I've also done a second test.  I'll talk about that more in the future, once I get all the results back. 

It's been quite a while since I've posted anything at FamilyScholars.org.  I have three articles that I'm working on.  I'm frustrated with myself for not getting things done in a timely manner, yet I can't just slap it on there without making sure that I'm saying everything exactly the way that I want it said.  I'm not good at juggling things, and being a wife and mother consumes most of my time and energy.  But my brain is contantly thinking.  Though if you knew me, it might surprise you to know that!

Update and Another FS Post

I'm still searching for my bio-father.  It's slow and I feel like I've hit another brick wall.  There are avenues that I can pursue to find more information, but one way seems like a cliff and the other way seems like a forest fire.  So which way do I go?  Both ways seem pointless.  But I guess I'll chose one, then the other.  When I can get my game face on again.

*********

I've posted again at FamilyScholars.org and I'm reposting it here.  Be sure to read the comments here.

Can I make a faith-based argument about donor conception in public?

The short answer is yes.

Over the last several decades, our country and the makeup of our culture have slowly begun to embrace a pluralistic worldview when it comes to life and the pursuit of happiness. A plethora of worldviews are gaining influence and strength within the public square. Unfortunately, those who profess a strong conviction for tolerance of all kinds of people and ideas are actually becoming more and more intolerant of the segment of our nation that happens to view life and happiness from a ‘religious’ perspective. From their view point, it seems that to engage in public debate, one does not need to bring up their ‘religion’ because ‘religion’ isn’t relevant or valid to today’s complicated social issues.

So to argue that one should not acknowledge their religion in public debate is to say that every point of view is valid except a religious POV. Why? Simply because someone doesn’t acknowledge the validity of a religious view over them doesn’t make the argument invalid.

The long answer goes something like this: every time anyone argues a position on a given topic, it’s always a “faith-based” answer. Your faith may not be the same faith as an organized religion; however everyone has some type of faith, including atheists. An atheist has faith in his or her assessment that there is no God. Basically faith is trust, so they are trusting in their own judgment/intellect/experience that what they believe is right. So there is trust, even if the person is claiming to have no faith in any deity.

How do you interpret the world around you? How do you determine what is right and what is wrong? Where do your ethics come from? How do your ethics influence what you believe about a particular subject? What is your worldview? Do you have faith that your perception of the world is correct?

As a Christian, I believe Scripture, when it says that God created the heavens and the earth. He determines what is right and wrong because of His character; He is always “right” and whatever is not right is sin; treason against God. So my sense of right and wrong and my ethics come from who God is. My view of who God is influences my POV on a given subject.

If a person puts their faith/trust/belief in secularism or atheism or humanism, etc., then I think it’s fair to say that everyone has some kind of “faith” so therefore every argument is a “faith-based” argument. Whether they may recognize it or not.

Misconceived: Misconceptions About Donor Conception

I posted this on FamilyScholars.org the other day.  Thought I'd put it here, too.  There were several good comments if you want to jump over there and read them.

***********

After finding out that my parents used a sperm donor to conceive me, the first place I went to on the Internet to find support was a bulletin board of moms that I frequented. It didn’t occur to me to use Google to find other donor conceived people. I just went to the sites I always went to. I posted a message asking if anyone was conceived with a sperm donor.


My very first reply was from a lady whose sister had used a sperm donor, and the little girl was about 3. This lady told me that I needed to write my parents a thank you note for raising me. She was very hostile and rude about it.

I don’t think I was mad about it so much as I was hurt. I needed someone to throw me a lifeline to pull me out of the depth of despair that was taking over my life, and she threw me a ton of bricks to sink me even deeper.

Since then, I’ve had a few responses that I assume were not well thought-out before they came out of the person’s mouth. I’ve been told that sperm donation is like giving blood, and that it’s like adoption. A couple of people have asked if I still think of my (social) dad as Dad.

So I’d like to clear up a few* misconceived ideas about donor conception. Please note that feelings about donor conception vary greatly from person to person. Sometimes, feelings vary greatly within just one person; they may be fine with it one day, and angry about it the next day.

I enlisted the help of several donor conceived people who contributed some of the misconceptions that they’ve heard from people. My thanks to you.

Misconception #1: “My Daddy’s Name is Donor.” The term “donor conceived” is actually an inaccurate term for most of us. Our fathers (or mothers in the case of egg donations) never “donated” gametes, but were paid for their services. A donation is what is given out of the generosity of heart, but money exchanged for goods is called a transaction. “Transaction conceived” doesn’t really have a nice ring to it, though, does it?

Misconception #2: The donor is not a parent. Once I got over the initial shock of this new reality, I realized that there is a man out there who is my biological father. Not just a “nice man” who helped create me, but an actual father; a man with whom I have a real substantial connection. Please realize that donors are not like McDonald’s where you can go and pick up a Dr. Pepper. I can buy a Dr. Pepper from McDonald’s close to home or three states away and it will be pretty much the same. I can even go to Wendy’s and get the exact same Dr. Pepper as McDonald’s.

A man and his sperm are not like a restaurant and its soft drinks. No man is exactly like another man, and his sperm is not exactly the same as another man’s sperm. The DNA that my father contributed to my creation cannot be duplicated by anyone else (unless he has an identical twin). My father’s sperm is uniquely his. I, Stephanie, exist because his sperm containing his unique DNA fertilized my mother’s egg with her unique DNA. He helped create me. He isn’t my Dad, but he is my father.

Misconception #3: Agreeing to parent another man’s child makes a man a Dad. This may or may not be true, depending on the man. Not all donor conceived people have good relationships with their social fathers. I am so blessed that I have a fantastic Dad who raised me. But many social fathers never really become “Daddy” to the child who was conceived with another man’s sperm. I think it takes a really special man to become a Dad (and by the name Dad, I’m implying that there is a special affectionate relationship to the child and he’s not just an authority figure) whether it is through donation, adoption, step-parenting, or any other situation in which a man finds himself parenting.

Misconception #4: Really wanting a child makes you a good parent. Even when a child is “really wanted,” it doesn’t guarantee that “really wanted” translates into good parenthood any more than getting pregnant by surprise makes a person a good parent.

As for a person being told that they were “really wanted,” one woman put it this way: “Well actually, NO! The baby my parents REALLY wanted was the one they could never have. I was just their second best option.”

Misconception #5: Using a donor is a cure to infertility. A cure to infertility is getting a couple pregnant using their own gametes when pregnancy wasn’t happening previous to the cure. Using a donor doesn’t make a couple fertile – it simply gets the woman pregnant using another man’s sperm. The husband/partner is still infertile.

Misconception #6: Every DC person wants a relationship with their non-present biological parent. Not every donor conceived person wants to find their biological father. Not everyone wants him to stay anonymous, either. People may bounce back and forth between both emotions over time. Some may want varying degrees of “knowing” – anywhere from a full-blown relationship to just seeing a picture and knowing a name. Others may just want a medical history. It’s not a safe assumption to think you know how a person feels about having knowledge about their biological parent. They themselves may not know what exactly they want.

Misconception #7: Donating sperm/eggs is like donating blood. Blood sustains life that already exists. Sperm/eggs are necessary to create life. I see no comparison at all.

Misconception #8: My child doesn’t need their biological parent. I/We are all they need. I’ve read it in the comments, both here and other places; couples feel that their love will fill all of the spaces in the child’s heart. I do want to say this as gently, but clearly as possible, because I’m aware that the love that a parent has for a child is so incredibly important. You are important to the child, whether you are the biological parent or not. If you are there in the child’s life, and you play the role of a loving parent, your child does need your love. No child can have too much love. But please understand that a child who grows up wanting to know who their biological parent is probably isn’t rejecting your love. There is just a need in many of us to know who they came from. You can never fill that hole in their heart. It isn’t because you aren’t a good enough parent. It’s because the hole is in the shape of the missing biological parent, and no matter how hard you try, you won’t fit into that shape any more than a square is going to fit into a round hole.

Misconception #9: Looking for my biological father means that I don’t love the man who raised me. False. The man who raised me is my Dad and always will be. Searching for my biological father in no way negates my love for my Dad. I have five children and I love all of them with my whole heart. I didn’t run out of love after the first one. That’s the great thing about love – loving one person doesn’t mean that there is no love left for anyone else. I love my Dad. I am interested in finding my father. These realities don’t cancel each other out. They coexist.

Misconception #10: Donor conception is just like adoption. Adoption happens when a child cannot be raised by his/her family for whatever reason. The parents are deceased or unfit or unavailable to take care of their child (or in some cases, forced to give up their child). The child isn’t generally created with the purpose of giving them away to another family.

Donor conception, on the other hand, is purposefully endeavoring to create a child who will never know or be with half of their biological family. The missing family will either be replaced by the mother’s partner’s family, or completely discarded all together (as in the case of single parents). Before the child is even created, half of the family tie is severed.

Misconception #11: All donor conceived people have a victim mentality. “Victim” is defined as “one that is acted on and usually adversely affected by a force or agent.” I would say that I have absolutely been adversely affected by a force or agent. I know that there are others who would say the same thing. But a victim mentality? No. I see men and women who are working hard to change laws around the world to protect those who haven’t yet been conceived in this manner from the pain that we endure. The blogs and articles I’ve read are about people who are trying to affect change within culture by making society aware of this situation.

(*There are SO MANY MORE misconceptions regarding donor conception – Tangled Webs UK is a great resource to read more about it. Check it out here and here.)

Copyright 2009-2011

Wow

God's up to something!  I am now blogging over at FamilyScholars.org - or at least I have the goal of blogging there.  My children are home from their grandparent's house and life is back in full swing.  Finding the time to sit and complete at thought has been challenging, but I'm so thankful for the opportunity to be there.

I Went Home. Sort of.

Last week, we made the impossible trip. 

When we left Dallas almost 9 years ago, I was glad.  9/11 had just happened and I was nervous about living in such a big city.  We were on our way to East Texas with our first child who was 3 months old.  Toward the end of our one year in East Texas, we planned on going back to Dallas to start a church with one of my husband's friends.  We temporarily moved in with my inlaws for what we thought would be 2 months until we could go back to Dallas.  During those 2 months, we made a couple of trips back to Big D.

And then we realized that we should not be part of that church plant.  The circumstances changed and we bowed out.  So then we were stuck in Louisiana with no job for my husband and I was pregnant with our second child.

The thought of Dallas was the thought of home.  I missed it like a child misses her mother.  I still can't even tell you why that place had such a place in my heart.  Perhaps it was because I lived there until I was 7 and had fond memories of it, or because it was where I married my sweetheart, or miscarried our first baby, or where I gave birth to our oldest son.  Maybe it was the friends we had, maybe it was the materialism and the lights.  Maybe it was the wide open sky view that wasn't obstructed by those stupidly tall pine trees that grew in East Texas.  Dallas was in my blood.  I wanted to go back.

I didn't go back for 8 years. 

When we hit north Texas last week, driving in on I-30, it was wonderful.  The sky was full of clouds, but it was a huge sky, nevertheless.  We got to our friends' home, ate dinner with them, and while they went to bed, we went driving.  We drove for a good 2 hours that night, after being in the car for 9 hours that day.  We went downtown and saw just how much it had grown.  We saw First Dallas, where my husband was on staff for a short while and looked at the new building.  We enjoyed I-75 because it's got to be one of the prettiest interstates in the country between downtown and 635 going north.

The next day, we loaded up and went to see our last apartment before we moved away.  We got to see friends unexpectedly.  And then we went to see it.  The place where I was conceived.  It wasn't the home my parents lived it.  It was a University.

I cried from the time I saw it until we drove away.  My dear husband pulled over in the middle of the campus and prayed for me as tears streamed down my cheeks.  I looked at the sidewalks and the doors and windows and wondered where he walked and what windows he looked out of.  I wondered where his classes were.  I wonder if he parked his car where we were parked. 

It was a weak connection to the man who sold his sperm to help create me, but it was all I had. 

Research...

I've done several hours worth of research online in the past few days.  Looking for doctors who could be my bio-father is tedious and back breaking.  Literally.  My back hurts from sitting at my desk.  But it's kinda therapeutic to find all of these men who were on campus at UT Southwestern Dallas when I was conceived in 1976. 

Most of them were from Texas according to the commencement lists I have, and most of them went back home to Texas after completing their residency elsewhere.  Some of them work in parts of Dallas, close to where my husband and I lived when we married.  It makes me wonder if we ever saw any of my bio-father's classmates when we lived there, or if our friends who still live in the DFW area are patients of these men that I'm looking at. 

It's really very interesting work, finding out about these doctors.  I've only found one of them so far who appears to have died.  A few I can't find online at all.  A couple of them have sons who A) were named after their fathers so that they both have the same name and B) are doctors, just like dear old dad.  Fortunately I can determine who I am looking at by checking out their education  information. 

A little more than half of the men I've found have current pictures online.  That is incredibly helpful, because I then have a young and old picture to compare my features with.

I've had a friend offer to help me look.  I appreciated the offer, but I declined.  When I said it's therapeutic to track these me, I was serious.  Somehow, it feels like I'm connecting to my father by finding out who he rubbed shoulders with for four years.  That looks really strange to write, and it probably sounds strange to read, but it's all I've got!  Also, I don't want someone else to miss some vital bit of information that might be helpful!

My fear is that my father wasn't a medical student at all, but was there in some other position, whether as part of the fellowship my mother's doctor was part of, or who knows - even a janitor.  I'm just so afraid that he is someone that I will never be able to track and my heart will be in limbo for the rest of my life. 

There are some younger people who have donor numbers to work from, and then there are those like me who *know* their fathers were med students, and thus have a student body to work from, but then there are those who have no more information than their mother's doctor's name.  So I'm thankful that I have as much information as I do to work from.

One of the things that I really dislike about myself is that I'm so critical of people.  Probably the biggest group of people that I'm critical of are the TV Christians who peddle the "gospel" to line their pockets.  Often times, it is no true Gospel that these people preach, but they sell Jesus as a means to an end.  "If you'll send your money to me, God is going to give you more money than your bank account can hold!"  It's called the prosperity gospel.  It's getting Jesus so you can get your Mercedes and big house.  It's a bunch of baloney.

Yet sometimes, I find myself thinking in the same way these buffoons preach - if God really loves me, he'll show me who my father is!  I love Jesus, so Jesus owes me!  UGH - I can't tell you how much I despise this thinking, and how I hate finding it in my own heart! 

Jesus doesn't owe me anything, as if I could do something that could make him indebted to me.  He is God of all creation...He is going to do what He wants to do without consulting me.  And I'm so glad!  I can trust that He will do what is right, because He works everything out for the good for those who love Him. 

However, it doesn't mean that I don't keep praying and keep searching.  I keep on keepin' on because I have to.  Even when it means a backache.

I'm still here!

It's been a few weeks since I last posted and I hate taking so long to blog.  I could bore you details about life here, but I won't.  But I will say that I've read more in the last week than I have all year and much of my free time has been spent on the couch soaking up good books.

It's been several weeks since I've done any research online.  I had a virus on my computer that redirected web pages that I clicked on, making any kind of searching next to impossible.  Now that that's cleaned off my system, I can get back to work.  It's on my to-do list for this week.

I'm also cleaning up an article that I'm working on.  More on that later, I hope.

I still want to finish answering questions that I've been asked in the past.  That's on the to-do list, too.  Maybe I can put the books down for a little while and complete my to-do list.