Selecting the "perfect" father.

I read an article a few months ago that if you compare the school performance of children raised by lesbian couples, heterosexual couples and single mothers that lesbian's kids do the best.

Of course, one could give possible reasons associated with socio-economic variables, but perhaps one should not overlook genetics.

Many, if not most, lesbians in the USA go to sperm banks to get inseminated. Sperm banks carefully screen for health and intelligence of donors which enables a woman to search for men that are gifted in genetic traits. Could this be why the children of lesbians do so well?

So here is my question: When you plan on starting a family, would you prefer a donor who excels in intelligence and health?

 

i think, considering feminists have the audacity to complain about a mans treatment of women - to use a woman as his trophy, his inferior

please stop treating men like cattle. it pisses me off, i'd give sperm to people who were desperate for children

not to some pretentious couple who can decide how superior their children should be in comparison to others. lesbian couples should have children, by all means, but maybe they should consider selecting a donor they know, trust and love

after all, having a male presence in life, even in a back seat role, is an entitlement to any child.

i'm sure this will be deleted, but i find it all deeply wrong and hypocritical. i'm not attacking you by the way, just the principle.

 

I don't think there is anything wrong with narrowing down donors using qualities you value. There are a LOT of donors on some of these sites and you have to narrow them down somehow, not to mention people want only the best for their kids.

So yes, intelligence and health are important factors for me. I'd rather choose a donor with good eye sight to balance out my bad, no history of cancer in the immediate family, no birth defects in the family, etc. I want my kid to be as healthy as I can make them. This includes picking a healthy donor.

And as for intelligence, sure, why not? I know that intelligence can help you go far in life. I'm smart and if my donor is smart too, chances are I'll pop out smart kids with the combination. Does that mean I don't want the kid if it's not really intelligent? Of course not, I'm just trying to do the best I can for the kid, even before it's born.

And as for having a male influence in life, I totally agree. That doesn't mean it has to be a daddy or donor, though. I have a father and two brothers that will be thrilled to be the manly influence in the lives of any child I have. I don't think I would ever choose a known donor, though, it's too risky. I've heard too many horror stories about donors who changed their minds and sued for partial custody or even full custody. A family doesn't need a daddy to succeed. My own father was raised by a single mother and his grandparents and he turned out very well. My mother had a traditional mother-father family and her dad was an abusive, drunken ass. Just because there's a man in the situation it doesn't mean everything is automatically better.

This goes ditto for a mommy, btw. Two daddies can do just fine without a mommy/surrogate in the picture so don't think I'm be all uber-feminist and man hating. A grandma, sister, good friend to be an auntie, granny, etc can do just as well. And I would expect them to be just as picky about their surrogate, wouldn't you?

 

If some geneticist found the gene that makes people lesbian and as a result of this people with this gene weren’t allowed to breed you lesbians would take issue. I don’t believe stupid is a genetic issue and let’s not forget ur child gets half its genetics from you.

 

Thanks Lily. Another thing that complicates the issue of selecting a friend is that many men would say no since child support laws in the USA might make him vulnerable to having to pay child support if the biological mother later decides to ask for it. Getting donor sperm is actually easier since these men are allowed to donate with absolutely no legal obligations to the offspring.

So if you go to a sperm bank why not find a donor who has excellent eyesight, no birth defects in his family, is in excellent health, etc.?

Oh, anther question -- have any women here considered actually being donors of eggs?

 

then just collect sperm from the bank - forget where it comes from and how superior it may or may not be.

 

You're right, Emelina, Most men would be too afraid of the woman going back on her promise, too. It's certainly happened, before.

A lot of men are also hesitant to begin with because they, understandably, don't want to completely give up their children. I know a lot of good, responsible men and I don't know of one of them that would want to 'abandon' a child like that. And that is how they see it. Donor banks are just easier all around. I'm so grateful to those men who donate and give us the chance to be mothers.

Imaginary Being - Funny how you completely ignored all my explanations on the subject. Tell me, if you have a child, don't you want to provide the very best for them? It's not about the mother feeling superior, it's about trying to give your kid the best chance in life you possibly can, even before birth. And besides, have you ever looked at a donor list? There are hundreds of names in each company. How would you suggest narrowing that down?

As for donating my eggs, I would love to if it were possible. I have fertility issues and I'll be lucky if I can get pregnant at all. If that weren't an issue then yes, I'd donate in a heart beat.

 

Nicely put.

Homosexuality is not a positive trait, from a survivability standpoint. And that as it is, it could even be considered an intelligence related one, because stupid people make decisions that keep their genes from being survivable.

So no, I really don't think that's right. Of course, you're already having an interesting sampling of the population, by going to a sperm bank, but that doesn't make further monkeying with things a good idea.

*edit* also, brains have nothing to do with happiness. You can raise a miserable genius, or a fulfilled simpleton. I'd rather be that simpleton. How you raise them will have more effect on both their own happiness, and their effect on others and the happiness of others, than who's swimmer it was.

 

i didn't read your post.

but, to me, it sounds like you place value on a gifted child - at least more so than on a not so gifted one.

i don't. i will provide for my children the old fashioned way, and not by sperm jacking mozart and buying them a casio.

 

^^^word^^^

i think it is kind of creepy in a sick way how people are able to filter through sperm donors like that and choose the father of their child. i wouldnt ever donate sperm to an anonymous deal.

if my friend was firing blanks though, i'd impregnate his girl for him

 

Thread moved from Lesbian to General Gay Section.. due to overwhelming male replies..

 

Men are so concerned with their sperm and get really offended when it is called into question. I don’t think women care this much about their eggs.

 

I could care less where my little soldiers go..

 

I don't care about mine personally.

But I care about systematic selection based on traits that could come with other traits or sets of traits, without examining all the possible outcomes (which is obviously quite impossible).

It just generally seems foolish and control-freak driven.

 

i don't care about sperm, i care about someone telling me my sperm may be inferior to someone else's.

 

thats what i ment^

 

it's a little annoying, as a man, because women berate us for apparently sexualizing women and only concerning ourselves with superficial qualities

the principle is exactly the same. i guess this is me raging against feminists :mickey:

 

I'm not saying one man is more inferior than another, I'm saying that you have a lot of men to choose from on those donor lists and you have to narrow it down! What? would you just do eeny meeny miney mo in our place? And it's only common sense that you don't want to mix some genes. The donor registries all tell if certain genes are present and if the mother has those same genes, the child can come out with birth defects, diseases, blind, deaf, etc.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with choosing traits you value from your donor. Does it guarantee the kid will have these traits? No and I wouldn't be disappointed if they didn't have them, just being able to have a child is a miracle to me and i will love them for who they are. But it doesn't hurt to try considering you have to narrow it down, anyway.

It seems like you guys are insulted that women won't fall all over themselves for your sperm and this is, at it's root, a pride issue. Your insulted that a woman might not want your sperm. Get over it. It's not your kid, it's theirs. Sure, some one would probably choose you, many will not. it's not personal, they are just choosing what works for them. Again, if you donate, you are only one of hundreds. Everyone has to choose traits so as to eliminate the large number of possibilities. I'm not going to let your pride keep me from choosing the best possible donor for my kid. End of story.

"it's a little annoying, as a man, because women berate us for apparently sexualizing women and only concerning ourselves with superficial qualities "

Please, don't pull the martyr card. Sexism goes both ways and so do unfair accusations. Your accusing us of being superficial and elitist when we were just talking about what traits we look for in a donor. Having a kid is a big deal and it's not a crime to want the best for your kid or to eliminate a large number of choices down to one.

 

It's understandable that you would want the best for your child, but I do think it's a little bit creepy that women would choose only their genetically preferred sperm. It's the same kind of issue as choosing the sex of your child. Reminds me too much of "1984".

On the other hand Imaginary Being, if you're offended that a woman would choose someone else's sperm over your own then don't donate to a sperm bank.

 

When people become parents they tend to lose objectivity on that role, have sacrificed a lot to become parents and thus place too much importance on that role.

A bit relaxed with the parenting, more likley the kid is going to grow up more independant.

Growing up, influence of their peers, social skills learned in early childhood, number and order of siblings are far more important than the role of the parent.

That and there little brains are working 5 times the speed of an adult, so they are always a couple steps ahead of you.

Single Mum, Single Dad, Lesbian Couple, Straight Couple doesnt matter because the role of the parent doesnt mean shit, you pay the bills, provide a safe environment, you're influence means sweet FA. They are naturally going to assume they are supposed to be an improvement on the last generation, thus not really listen to you - or pretend to value your wisdom so you feel better and give them more pocket money.

Intelligence isnt genetic, more to do with early childhood learning, so their pre school teacher is far more of an influence in that regard, whom you probably wont have time to investigate and you'll work out too late what to look for.

A lot of things in genetics skip a generation, so get the sperm of a neurosurgeon who had a truck driver for a father, and you are just as likely to get the truck driver again.


Or to summarize, there are far too many variables for you to pre plan anything with a measureable chance of success