Well who didn’t see this one coming.
I’ve heard many men complaining that their children ignore them when they become adults. Men, of course, have begun blaming motherhood for this. I guess men presumed that when they bogarted their way into the nursery, that it set up some kind of reverse debit system. Whereas kids were then supposed to be more involved with their fathers as they grew older, since men paid so much more attention to children today then their fathers ever paid to them. This should have been obvious, right?
Sadly this isn’t the way it works.
Mothers don’t invest the time they do in their children because they are looking for some ultimate payback when the kids reach maturity. Instead, it is the inutero bonding that sets the stage for the mothers’ love which follows. Which is why the mother/child bond is unique. Most women already intuitively know that bond is the only ‘payday’ a mother ever receives. Since you can be a good, bad or indifferent mother going forward and it guarantees you nothing in the way of future contact, visits or even telephone calls from your kids. Actually some of the best mothers I know rarely see their kids. As once their children have left the nest (or launched as gender neutral proponents now like to say) many move half way across the country or even to Europe and have such full lives there is quite simply little time to visit with their mothers. Maybe once or twice a year if that. Yet their mothers are content, as they know their children are doing well...
This mother/child bond exists, even for the mothers who give their children up for adoption. Which is why when a mother is giving a child up for adoption, hospital personnel generally won’t even let her see the baby or hold it after it is born…as the result could be the mother changing her mind once she is confronted with the reality of the child. But even if she never sees her child, she can be content as a mother if she knows her child has been given a good home and upbringing, one that she couldn't provide...that's a mother's love.
Not so with a sperm donor as it's a totally income driven process, the donor could care less who receives the sperm or what is done with it. Actually they could be using the deposited sperm for a scientific experiment for all a donor knows.
Anyway men attempting to compare the mother/child bond with the experience of a sperm donor are doomed to failure, as this latest nonsense attests. To be honest, I don’t believe there was ever any large amount of children conceived via sperm donation trying to contact their ‘fathers’. This was men trying to equate themselves with mothers, who gave up children for adoption. Clearly a bond exists between those mothers and children as anyone with common sense could attest to. It is NOT the same with sperm donors. This was a bunch of foolishness to begin with, instigated by men, always trying to act like the world revolves around them. The process of donating sperm does not equate with nurturing a child inutero, bonding with it and giving birth to said child from your own body as mothers do.
No bond is formed because a man discharges a bodily fluid into a dixie cup while looking at pictures of naked women.
Sorry but there is no comparison here between a sperm donor and a mother.
This was men trying to be at the center of the universe in all things once again.
Sigh...the endless struggle continues.
Kids ignore chance to meet donor dads
Kate Jones, medical reporter
November 06, 2006 12:00am
DESPITE new laws and a statewide advertising campaign, no Victorian children conceived by donor sperm have tried to find their biological parents. (emphasis mine: they mean biological fathers, as a mother cannot be a sperm donor. This is more of men trying to equate themselves with mothers. I'm sure many adoptive children wish to meet their biological mother.)
More than 100 young Victorians, who have turned or will turn 18 between July and December this year, are eligible under the new consent laws to apply for identifying information about their biological parents.
The laws came into effect on July 1.
But so far, the Infertility Treatment Authority has yet to receive one application from a donor-conceived child.
ITA chief executive Louise Johnson said many children may not be aware they were conceived with the aid of a donor, "or the time may not be right for them," she said.
It is thought 30 to 50 per cent of donor-conceived children are not told about their true origins.
Next year, more than 200 donor-conceived children will be eligible to contact their biological parents. Donors also have the right to apply for information about children.
Providing there is consent, a donor and child may contact each other.
The ITA has received 10 applications from donors wanting to know details about offspring and 16 donors have voluntarily supplied their information. (emphasis mine: I'm sure that should be interesting. AND if the 'father' conceived 16 or 60 kids with his deposits, I'm sure he'll now lead a rich full life with all his 'children' congregating around his home come the holiday. What a lot of nonsense.)