allina Posted January 24, 2011 Posted January 24, 2011 Am I the only one who would consider AI? How interesting. I wouldn't under the circumstances listed in the OP as I would never, ever become a single mother by choice. I would do it if it was somehow necessary for a fertility issue, but not to be a single mom.
aerogurl87 Posted January 24, 2011 Posted January 24, 2011 I wouldn't under the circumstances listed in the OP as I would never, ever become a single mother by choice. I would do it if it was somehow necessary for a fertility issue, but not to be a single mom. This is exactly how I feel. I'm not becoming a single mother by choice ever, no matter how badly I may want children. yes it is legal in most places. i've read up on it and usually people do it when their siblings turn out to be unfit parents and/or lose custody of their children(from drug addictions or whatever). the biggest issue with it is the drama of having the parent still involved in the child's life. i wouldn't have that problem, unfortunately. my brother is in a vegetative state and most likely will be for the rest of his life. none of his disabilities are inherited...he got in a car accident at 16 and was severely brain damaged. i have been struggling with the issue of how i might bring up the child's background and how they would deal with that....my family is still on the fence but this is something my mom really wants to do and if she did i would want to make sure the child was taken care of. To me this just sounds selfish as the emotional toil this would place on the child is unnecessary. Your parents want grand children so bad that they'll do it at the cost of having an innocent child go through the trauma of virtually being an orphan for no reason. Why can't they just wait for you to have a child yourself? I'm sure that a court would find this to be unethical as well.
Els Posted January 24, 2011 Posted January 24, 2011 With recent advancements, women are often able to give birth to healthy children even in their 40s (although part of the 'advancement' is because you can scan the fetus for genetic defects, especially those that signify Downs Syndrome, and choose to have it aborted). So if I were in my 30s, single, and wanted a child badly, I would wait. Anything could happen within the next 10 years. Then again, I qualify for 0/3 of the above criteria, so to be fair my assessment may be flawed.
Woggle Posted January 24, 2011 Posted January 24, 2011 The responses to this thread are surprising to say the least.
tinktronik Posted January 24, 2011 Posted January 24, 2011 I wouldn't under the circumstances listed in the OP as I would never, ever become a single mother by choice. I would do it if it was somehow necessary for a fertility issue, but not to be a single mom. That's exactly why I would be willing to make a choice towards AI. But then again, I've been married, had children and dealt with legal issues over children.
allina Posted January 24, 2011 Posted January 24, 2011 The responses to this thread are surprising to say the least. Why? There has been no bashing of men, is that the surprise?
Woggle Posted January 24, 2011 Posted January 24, 2011 Why? There has been no bashing of men, is that the surprise? Quite honestly I did expect a bunch of father bashing and talking about how they are useless sperm donors.
allina Posted January 24, 2011 Posted January 24, 2011 Quite honestly I did expect a bunch of father bashing and talking about how they are useless sperm donors. Surprise, we value and respect the roles of fathers! I hope you were pleasantly surprised.
Star Gazer Posted January 24, 2011 Posted January 24, 2011 I wouldn't under the circumstances listed in the OP as I would never, ever become a single mother by choice. I would do it if it was somehow necessary for a fertility issue, but not to be a single mom. What do you mean?
allina Posted January 24, 2011 Posted January 24, 2011 What do you mean? I mean that I would only use AI if it was somehow needed in order for me and my husband to have a child. I don't know enough about reproductive assistance to know if that's something that would even be used for a couple who is struggling to conceive, but if it is I'd be open to it. I would not use AI in order to get pregnant because I was single and wanted a baby.
eerie_reverie Posted January 24, 2011 Posted January 24, 2011 It seems a little wrong to bring a child into the world knowing he would be fatherless, when there are so many unwanted kids out there who need homes. For that reason, I would prefer the adoption route, but honestly, I could probably get my fix volunteering at a school or something.
sb129 Posted January 24, 2011 Posted January 24, 2011 The dream of getting married and havng a family is getting more out of reach with each passing year. Yet, you don't to miss out on being a mum. Would you do it? Yes. Although I would prefer NOT to be a single mother. I would rather do it alone than not at all though. When I was single, my response would have been no. It might be a trust issue since who knows who's or what DNA is within the sperm, regardless of what the fertility bank claims especially since they don't know if their donors are being honest. Instead of doing that, I might have selected a close friend to be a knowledgeable donor. This way, the history's all there from a trusted source. Agreed. If this was possible for me I would consider this option first. I heard that they rarely let single women adopt kids... If this is not true, I would definitely go that route. I would be doing something to help the kid + I wouldn't have to put my body through stress of pregnancy. I don't know about Australia, but adoption in NZ is a very very difficult and protracted process. OG- you do know that your body is specifically designed for pregnancy right? Its not that much of a stress- it does recover! I'm afraid I agree with anne1707 - a person in a vegetative state cannot give consent, and therefore using them for reproductive purposes seems abusive and ethically wrong. It also seems wrong to inflict such a situation on an innocent child, who would undoubtedly find it difficult to cope with having a surrogate mother and a vegetative father. I'm also confused as to why your parents would consider using your brother to produce grandchildren when they have you - cant you just have a grandchild for them without all of the ethical and legal issues? It seems like the best option since you would adopt your brother's child anyway... I agree with this- the fact that your parents are considering using your brother to make grandchildren is a little.... weird. Especially since you are in the picture. It would be different if he was already married etc and his wife had agreed previously that in such an event she could store his sperm. It seems a little wrong to bring a child into the world knowing he would be fatherless, when there are so many unwanted kids out there who need homes. For that reason, I would prefer the adoption route, but honestly, I could probably get my fix volunteering at a school or something. Thats all well and good but see above.
denise_xo Posted January 24, 2011 Posted January 24, 2011 Quite honestly I did expect a bunch of father bashing and talking about how they are useless sperm donors. With all due respect, Woggle, the fact that you have often engaged in bashing the opposite sex (although your posts have greatly changed in tune lately) doesn't mean that we all do it.
OpenBook Posted January 24, 2011 Posted January 24, 2011 Although I admire single women who voluntarily become mothers (Sheryl Crow comes to mind) whether via adoption or sperm donor, I personally would never choose either scenario voluntarily. I have been a single mom, it's a REALLY REALLY tough road and and I am still measuring the emotional toll it has had on my DD not to have had her father around helping raise her when she was a kid. Therefore it would never be something I would choose to do voluntarily. Not without a good man & good marriage as the backdrop.
LittleTiger Posted January 24, 2011 Posted January 24, 2011 No, definitely not. I was married for the whole of my 30s (now 46 and divorced) and I didn't even have the desire to have children until I met the man I'm with now. Sadly, I've missed the boat . I may still be able to get pregnant but not to my man as he's had 'the snip'. I still believe I made the right decision though. To me, having a child is about the desire to reproduce with the man you love and to join their genes with your own to make a family - I don't really understand the desire to have a child for the sake of it. If it's just a desire to be a mother, then surely adoption would be a better route to take or, as others have suggested, pick a 'father' who is actually going to care about the child.
Woggle Posted January 24, 2011 Posted January 24, 2011 With all due respect, Woggle, the fact that you have often engaged in bashing the opposite sex (although your posts have greatly changed in tune lately) doesn't mean that we all do it. This is true. This thread is just a really pleasant surprise. I might have to take a second look at my views after this.
radiodarcy Posted January 24, 2011 Posted January 24, 2011 nope. not interesting in having kids. and i'm definitely not interested in being a single parent. i'll be 35 next month and have yet to feel the ticking of a biological clock - - either it's broken or being a "mom" to my dog and two cats is enough for me
phillyfan Posted January 24, 2011 Posted January 24, 2011 Dude shudnt this post be 'in your 40s' not 'in ur 30s'? My neighbor had a kid and she was 36 and a coupla ladies I work with are both about the same age as that and had kids not so long ago.
Recommended Posts