Friday, November 19, 2010

The ignorant "experts" and the damage they cause

A discussion has been building this week in response to a post on Family Scholar blog last Friday.  The post was not the spark, new guest blogger Ralph was discussing him and his partner using a surrogate to have their young twins.  It was the comments below that sparked such heated debate that I had to blog about it.  Mainly because of a single person who posted.  Eleanor, a social worker and self-proclaimed "expert" in donor conception, commented on several occasions (here and here) and made some VERY lofty conclusions.

Here's some comments I found most disturbing/frustrating:
"Love and respect makes the difference in outcome more than structure does." 
"I would rather see a disucssion [sic] about how to respond to the difficulties, complexities and complications of raising children who are strong enough, relational enough, adaptible enough and loving enough to cope with life and the odd cards life gives all of us at times." 
"The children I know who were conceived using donars [sic] are all doing well. The assumption somehow that they are damaged by the process simply doesn’t match my experience."
 "Male donars [sic] have been used for decades, and many MDs have put themselves through school using the money they earned, and felt good about it." 
"The children of these kinds of arrangements often seem to be better cared for than the average child — especially those who were unplanned."
"The clients who I have worked with who have children who had both sperm and egg donars [sic] now have wonderful children. One set of twins in particular are two of the happiest kids I know." 
"I would love to see any research indicating that there is some huge discrepancy in how they turn out as adults as opposed to those who are born “the normal” way."

Now, I responded to Eleanor's two comments, here and here, so you can see what I wrote to her in response.  But I am going to reiterate what my feelings are on these comments, and add some more thoughts to this situation that need to be addressed.


(1) "Love and respect makes the difference in outcome more than structure does." 
Wow, this one is so basic I'm not even sure if I can bring myself to actually talk about it!  But, for the sake of the post, here it goes.  Love has nothing to do with donor-conceived individuals desire to know his or her biological parent.  Parents need to get over their own emotions and fears and acknowledge that this primal need to know one's roots is not an attack on their child-rearing practices or their capacity as a parent.  It's not about you.  It's about us and our need to know.

(2) "I would rather see a disucssion [sic] about how to respond to the difficulties, complexities and complications of raising children who are strong enough, relational enough, adaptible enough and loving enough to cope with life and the odd cards life gives all of us at times." 
I responded to Eleanor with the following: You say that you would rather see discussion about the complexities of raising children strong enough to cope with what life throws at them. The problem is, why does it have to be the children conceived in these manners who must adapt and cope with their situation? What about the commissioning parent(s) who chose to use a donor/surrogate because they are infertile (medically or socially)? Why should they not be strong enough and adaptable enough to cope with this loss?? Why must we perpetuate that loss onto the child? It floors me that it is the offspring who are forced to adapt to a situation that was created intentionally, to make them cope with that situation! Adopted persons, those born to unfit parents who do raise them (abusive, alcoholics, etc), those who live with parents who fight, are divorced, etc. Any of life’s curve balls that are thrown in a person’s direction that we cannot control, however donor conception IS something that can be controlled and not resorted to. Yet it is, and the offspring are the ones who are left to pick up the pieces and suffer the losses.


(3) "The children I know who were conceived using donars [sic] are all doing well. The assumption somehow that they are damaged by the process simply doesn’t match my experience."

WHOA, hold the phone!!!  Key word here: CHILDREN.  Okay, so this woman knows a few donor-conceived kids and they're all perfectly happy.  What "assumption" is she referring to here?  The one that ADULT donor-conceived persons are TELLING her directly how they feel?!?!

(4) "Male donars [sic] have been used for decades, and many MDs have put themselves through school using the money they earned, and felt good about it." 

And...might I add, many former donors are now realizing the consequences of those decisions they made so long ago and are seeking their biological children.  Also, how does she know they feel good about it? Most donors don't feel anything about it - on purpose.  Sperm donation is so medicinalized that these donors are not even really thinking about the outcomes.  Also, many medical students in particular, especially in decades past, were pressured or even coerced into donating by their professors.  It's akin to young single women coerced into relinquishing their children to adoption...put on the spot and in many cases not even given a choice.  Same went for many of these donors.  I've spent time talking with former donors who while the professors and department chairs were not holding guns to their head, in a much more subliminal way, they knew that if they wanted to do well they better be supplying.

It's also extremely offensive to donor-conceived adults to have someone with such "expertise" and someone who is supposedly a social worker, putting it so bluntly.  She might as well have said that 'many college students filled their fridges with beer from the money they earned'.  While most of us do realize the bullshit about altruism is just that - BS, having it spelled out so blatantly from someone who considers herself a professional in the mental health field, is just downright tactless.


(5) "The children of these kinds of arrangements often seem to be better cared for than the average child — especially those who were unplanned."

Says who??  Is she claiming that the majority of parents are unfit?  I know of plenty of donor conceived adults who were not well cared for.  If not not well cared for, many social fathers are distant with their donor-conceived children, and just based on discussion on PCVAI, it seems that there is a much higher probability of divorce in donor-conceived families and mental illness among recipient mothers.

Just as there are many terrible adoptive parents, there are many terrible donor conception recipient parents.  Lets be honest, there are just terrible parents out there in general, regardless of whether they are biological or not.  However, studies have shown that, in particular, children raised by non-biological father-figures are more often physically and/or sexually abused than children reared by their biological fathers.

For example, this 2005 study found that:
"The findings also make it clear that male perpetrators who are not biological fathers were more commonly associated with physical abuse and sexual abuse, older children, and female children. Similarly, when acting alone, biological fathers and father surrogates were more often perpetrators of physical and sexual abuse, but when acting with the mother were more often associated with neglect. The relatively large proportion of stepfathers and adoptive fathers associated with sexual abuse, as well as with older, female children, suggests the need for prevention efforts in blended and adoptive families."


(6) "The clients who I have worked with who have children who had both sperm and egg donars [sic] now have wonderful children. One set of twins in particular are two of the happiest kids I know." 
That's great, I'm glad to know there's one set of young donor conceived kids out there who are happy! .  Sorry, I hate to break it to you Eleanor, but your logic is severely flawed.  Most of us offspring had very happy childhoods.  Children are not able to comprehend higher level thinking and emotions.  Even though I've known all my life I was donor-conceived it was not until I was a late teen that I really fully understood what it meant and how unethical it is.  I was curious about my biological father before that, but it was not the burning desire that I experienced later.  Childhood happiness is not an accurate predictor of adult compliance with donor conception issues.  Many offspring are well into their 20s or 30s before it dawns on them.  Often it's a life-changing event that triggers it....marriage, birth of their own children, death of a parent, etc.


(7) "I would love to see any research indicating that there is some huge discrepancy in how they turn out as adults as opposed to those who are born “the normal” way."
Karen quickly referred Eleanor to the "My Daddy's Name Is Donor" report.  Obviously this woman couldn't be that much of a donor-conception expert if she didn't even KNOW about this report!!  Whether or not she agrees, the fact that she has no idea that this study has been completed and actually FOUND that yes there was a discrepancy between donor-conceived adults and adults who were raised in traditional nuclear families.

**********************************
So now, why did I spend so much time attacking this woman, and what was my point?  Well, it's the fact that this woman claims she is an expert and for recipient parents, those trying to conceive, and anyone else who is interested in the psychological implications of donor conception might seek this woman out and actually listen to her!!  These types of people are poisoning minds with their false claims and uneducated conclusions.  They undermine the voices of adult offspring who are speaking out, because as a society we believe that we should be able to trust an expert.  We trust our doctors to accurately diagnose us and prescribe the best medicine - not the medicine that they were most wined-and-dined for by the drug reps.  We trust therapists and social workers to provide us with accurate information regarding such important  decisions as using a donor to conceive a child, and we trust that what they say is true, because of course they are a professional.

These so-called "experts" will tell their clients what they WANT to hear, but not necessarily the truth.  Why?  Because people do not want to be told bad news.  These "experts" are more concerned about their paychecks than they are about the people they are supposedly trying to assist.  A couple looking to use a donor, if you tell them that they need to really think about this decision because many adults conceived via donors have been damaged...that therapist knows that that couple is just going to go find a second opinion and tell all their friends that they are a bad therapist.

But isn't it unethical, as a medical professional, to lie to your clients/patients?  YES.  But in the mental health field, it's very easy.  Especially when these professionals are intertwined with the infertility industry.  I doubt there is any counselor employed by an infertility clinic that would actually tell their clients about the POVs of adult offspring.  Nope, they filter what is provided and only the "good" results are given.  Counselors are not advising their clients to read the MDND report, or my blog, or any of the other opinions out there.  Most counselors are still advising their clients to LIE to their children!!!!  If that doesn't tell you something....I don't know what would.

To recipient parents, individuals trying to conceive, and those who are looking to use a donor - please educate yourself beyond what you are told by your doctor or any infertility counselor.  Do your homework.  Listen to what adult offspring have to say.  Write to us with questions.  Learn as much as you can now to prepare yourself.

Friday, November 12, 2010

November changes

So it's November again, and it's another November that I've found myself entirely too busy with my life (outside the DC community) to participate in NaBloPoMo (National Blog Posting Month) -- November is National Blog Posting Month, where bloggers around the world attempt to blog once a day for 30 days.  However, in the spirit of the month I've decided to reinvent Cryokid with some major updates to a variety of sections.

A New Look!
Obviously the most noticeable change you can't help but notice!  Yes, I've designed a new template for Cryokid, feeling I'd outgrown the ultra-bold color scheme I originally designed back in 2008 when HTML was less advanced.  A play on "cryo", I went with an ice cube pattern...yet after my post last week, I do hope no one finds this offensive!  I find it sardonically funny, but some say I have a twisted sense of humor :o)

Pages
I've also added a newer feature to be fully implemented into blogger, and that is static pages.  You'll see at the top of my blog, there are tabs listing several pages.  Right now I am busy working on the DNA page...you can check out what I've done so far here.

I am interested in hearing about what you, the readers, would want me to put up on these pages.  Are there topics or old posts that you want to have easily accessible and long-term?  

Newspaper Articles
I also moved the newspaper article links that used to reside midway down in the right column to their own page.  As you can see, they are in dire need of updating, but it's a matter of going back through my emails and locating all the articles that  have been published in the past two years!  This is not a top priority, as I've realized that the old drop-down menus were rarely used anyways, and the recent articles are easily found on Google.

Old Donor Lists
I have also added a considerable number of old donor lists, but would greatly appreciate any others that people may have!  What I am looking for are a scanned copy of old donor lists that the clinic/sperm bank/doctor provided for you (recipient moms) to choose a donor from.  This is a great resource for offspring and parents who were not given donor numbers and/or records were destroyed.  I am in dire need of pre-1990 donor lists, so if anyone has lists from sperm banks or clinics from the 1970s and 1980s especially, please email me!

And more!!!
I'm hoping to continue making changes to the look and feel of the blog, but don't worry I will still be the honest outspoken advice-giving activist that you love!!

I'm going to be laying out some major topics I want to tackle in 2011, so if there is something I have not touched on, or you want me to reiterate, let me know!

Friday, November 5, 2010

A rose by any other name...

Diane Allen posed a question the other day to many of us about terminology.  A friend of Diane's and supporter of donor conceived people asked her, in response to the recent article "Generation of cryokids crying out to know their dads" by Denise Ryan in the Vancouver Sun (10/28), about the term "cryokid", wondering where it came from because she believed it to be demeaning.

Now, being that I am THE cryokid I suppose I personally can't see it offensive in the raw.  I picked the name Cryokid because it was unique/catchy and sounded good with Confessions of..., easy to remember, and reflected the way in which I was conceived (frozen sperm).  In all honesty, I was more offended by the use of the term cryokid in her article without any reference to my blog!!!

However, similar to many in the African American community using the "n-word" amongst themselves as a term almost of near endearment, cryokid is something that I can call myself (and any other offspring who wants to), but when someone from the outside uses the term to put us in a box, it becomes something that is insulting.  One reason being the ending..."kid".  We are adults, we are not children, and when the media uses terms like "donor babies", "cryokids", or any other combination that uses child/baby/kid within, it gives the illusion that we are helpless and infantile, and not equal to other adults.

Secondly, the term "cryokid" is only is applicable to the most recently conceived donor offspring, those born after the mid-1970s, when cryogenics was first introduced into the infertility industry.  Those conceived previously, and many conceived concurrently from the 1970s through the mid-1980s, of fresh non-frozen sperm, this is not an accurate word, and diminishes the fact that there are persons conceived through anonymous sperm donation who are much older. 

Like many other terms in the donor conception world, it's demeaning to be categorized as such by someone from the outside.  We typically consider ourselves "donor conceived people" because it's the most simple way to refer to us, however the fact is, most of us consider our biological father as such, not as a donor.  He was our parent(s) donor, but he is and always will be our biological father.  Therefore, even the basic term "donor conceived" seems to not accurately convey who we truly are.  


****Updated 11/9/10****

I've decided to attempt a list of some of the most common terms and try to explain how they are offensive or inaccurate, and if applicable, more politically correct terms, as well as what we adult individuals conceived from third-party gametes, believe to be a more acceptable term.

1. Sperm/Egg Donor
As I mentioned early and many other times before, donor is an inaccurate term to use for the man or woman who sold their gametes.  First off, donor is misleading (at least in the USA), where donors are paid exuberant prices.  Sperm donors are paid per shot, usually around $100 each "donation".  Most donors supply their sperm 3-5 times a week for a year or more....this turns out to be between $15,000 and $26,000 a year!!  Now, if we take into account college students schedules of 30 weeks on campus, that is still a range of $9,000 to $15,000 per year!!  Try to make that waiting tables.  Egg donors make considerable more, closer in the range of $20,000 for each cycle --- mainly because extracting eggs is a much more invasive (and less fun) medical procedure that includes weeks of giving yourself injections, and can actually cause significant damage leaving some egg donors infertile after the procedure!
PC term: Sperm/Egg seller, Sperm/Egg supplier, Sperm/Egg vendor
What we think: Biological father/mother, Genetic father/mother

2. Donor Conceived
So the issue with the term donor conceived are fairly obvious.  Our biological father, not OUR donor (he was our parent(s) donor/vendor), so saying that we are "donor" conceived makes it sound like we do not have a biological father.  This is exactly what the company that sells the shirts, bibs, etc with "My Daddy's Name Is Donor" is trying to portray, and why that company is offensive to anyone conceived using third-party gametes.  No amount of sugar-coating can hide the fact that we do have a biological father.  He's not just a nice man that helped our parents, he just didn't give them a "seed" so we could grow.  All of this dehumanizes us to a point where we were conceived immaculately! Hiding the fact that we have a biological father by referring to him as a donor makes us feel as though we are not equal to others who were conceived by their mother and father.  We were too, except our mother and father never met.  But that does not make him any less of a biological father.
PC term: Persons conceived via third-party gametes
What we think: Donor conceived is acceptable, only because there is no other term that is convenient to be using that is more appropriate.  However, we still do not like the term.

3. Offspring
No, I'm not referring to that 90s band or a litter of kittens (or the mice I bred while working in the lab).  This ridiculously demeaning word describes human beings.  No one else in their right mind would ever call a "normal" person an offspring.  I suppose in the most curt language, we are all offspring, however it is not something that is typically referring to human beings.  It's meant for lower orders of animals.  So by referring to people conceived via third-party gametes as "offspring" is highly offensive.  The term artificial insemination comes from cow breeding, does this mean that we are seen on the same level as farm animals??
PC term: Persons conceived via third-party gametes
What we think: If we had to chose between donor conceived persons and offspring, most would chose donor conceived, because it is more descriptive of who we are (I mean, "offspring" that could mean we are the offspring of apes or cows or aliens), and somewhat less offensive.

4. "Cryokids", "Donor Babies", "Donor Kids", and the list goes on....
Since this is what brought this list about, I figured I should add it, but by now at least you should understand the problem here.  Just as adopted persons have fought against perpetually living as infants/children, donor conceived adults struggle with the same thing.  This is mainly the fault of the media, who thinks it's cute to call us "Donor Babies", even when many of us have children and grandchildren of our own!  We might have been cute and complacent as infants, however, we grow up.  And to assume that we have the same maturity level that we did at age 3 or 7 is ridiculous and degrading.  Many parents claim that their donor conceived children are perfectly fine and that we the donor conceived adults speaking out are emotionally unstable and ungrateful to be alive, etc...I should hope that I have gained a much greater understanding in 20 years for morality humanity.  Most of us as children did not think much about being donor conceived, it was not something that bothered us.  But we also at that age have a very limited sense of self and of the greater world.  We are physically and emotionally incapable of higher levels of thinking.  Some individuals never progress past this and never are able to reach this level of thinking.  However, for those that can and do, we begin to understand our conception in a different light than we did as small children.  To forever place us in the mold of being children, without comprehension and maturity, it diminishes the fact that we are adults with the same rights as other adults, and that our views and our opinions are just as important and just as relevant.
PC term: Donor conceived adults/persons
What we think: We're adults here, just like you, at least give us that much!!


Question for the readers: What terms would you add to this list?  What are more politically correct terms?