Thursday, April 9, 2009

Grandchildren at all Costs

Sometimes I worry that eventually I will run out of things to write about in this blog. It has to happen someday, right? I mean how many issues and topics about pronatalism and childfreedom are there to write about? Eventually the well has to run dry.

But, just when I have this thought, another story always presents itself. And here is the next one: a woman, whose 21 year old son died in an assault, petitions the court to harvest his sperm so she can have grandchildren.

Visit for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

While I sympathize with this woman for losing her son (who she obviously loved very much), I have to say that this is about the most selfish and unethical thing I have ever heard. When I saw this on the Today Show this morning, I was actually rendered speechless, so what does that tell you?

Your thoughts?


Steph said...

I don't really see the point.It's not like she would have any legal right over the resulted kid. There is no saying that the woman who would agree to be inseminated won't turn into a crazy harpy just looking for money and keeping the kid from her. I think the whole idea is insane.

Anonymous said...

I feel sorry for the woman having to lose her son. I think she is not thinking rationally due to her grief. I think it just goes to show you though: genetic immortality is so important for some people, they will do anything to get it, even if it doesn't make any sense to them.

Gumby said...

It's interesting how it's all about her - her healing, her having a grandchild. What about her son? If he really had wanted children, how would he feel about his children being brought into world without a father? And what about the potential child being raised without his/her father?!
I mean, I could understand the case of a wife wanting her husband's sperm after his life being tragically cut short before they had a chance to have children (although that would still be a bit questionable, I think, albeit understandable) but there isn't even a probable mother here!!


Schrodinger's Kittens said...

At about 6:10 on the video, the lawyer justifies their actions by saying that it's "...what the son would have wanted, as far as we know."

Wait, what? "As far as we know?" That's just flimsy justification. And I really like (not) the mom's tortured analogy between organ donation and sperm harvesting.

I'm sorry for her loss but I agree with iandysgrl, this woman is not thinking rationally. The way she talks about "what he said" with respect to having kids doesn't sound like what a 21 year old guy would say at all. It sounds like what a woman mooning over grandkids and "genetic immortality" would say.

And what woman would agree to be impregnated? Not that his genetic material is inferior or anything, I just don't think you're going to find anyone that altruistic. Or maybe they will find someone or they'll pay a ton of money, I don't know. But to me, the whole thing is like some sort of horror movie.

Childfreeeee said...

I agree with you guys and I also thought it was interesting when she and lawyer said that this is what the son would have wanted. Really? Is this something they sat down and had a talk about when he was alive, "Mom, if I die, I want you to harvest my sperm and hire a surrogate to have my child." I don't think so.

Sure, the son may have said he wanted to have kids at some point. He may have picked out their names. But making the leap that he would have wanted sperm harvested out of his dead body is a ridiculous stretch.

And then there's something creepy about a mother having this kind of ownership over her son's sexual being. Like Gumby said, it would feel a little more acceptable if this was a WIFE seeking to save her husband's sperm, but a MOTHER? Since when do mothers have ownership over their children's reproductive facilities?

The whole thing just creeps me out.

Ellie said...

That is really twisted and sad. Talk about misdirecting your grief.

StayTheCurse said...

Another great day for natalism. SpermThiefMom, like OctoMom, is the epitome of selfishness, and again, this may have been an adjective she's used on us. Of course I'm sorry for her loss, but instead of seeking counseling, she basically has become Dr.Frankenstein. Most sickening is her allowing her lawyer to claim "it's what he would have wanted"..oh, really? Did his driver's license list "gonads" in the donor section? Did he write a notarized letter to mom saying, "If I go before you, do you love me enough to suck the cum out of my dead nutsac?!!" And just as the embryologist for octomom needs to go to jail, the judge that ruled on this needs to be disbarred. This is a clear cut case of violation of a corpse. And are even the advocates of this not creeped out that it's his MOM, not his spouse?! It's like "Psycho" in reverse! As was mentioned by other posters, now the real ethical/ emotional fun begins..what if the surrogate changes her mind? And who will raise the 'grandthing', mom? She's in her 40's and apparently unattached. Assuming the kid grows up more ethically centered than grandma, what will it feel when it finds out that dad was a cadaver?? We can only hope it grows up to be the opposite of granny; with no sick need to replicate his/her loved ones. Here's to procreation!!

Lynn said...

I read this in the paper yesterday and thought even the dead don’t have the choice whether or not to have children! It makes me sick!

Anonymous said...

First though?

Does an Oedipus complex work both ways?