Log in

View Full Version : Destroy and Thaw Frozen Embryos?This



Pages : 1 [2]

Vyanka
11-24-2015, 11:13 AM
Let's say she had the baby. There's a big chance this kid would want to know who the biological father is, even if he/she grew up with a good father figure. It's natural wanting to know. That biological parent is gonna be douchebag to that child bc he didn't agree to be a parent. So this man would be considered d-bag for agreeing or disagreeing being the biological....he can't win. I find that unfair too. It would emotionally sting for that child. That child is always going to ask why this and that.

For me personally, I care more about the emotional well being of the child than my need to be a parent. I've witnessed someone throughout the years wondering about the biological he never met, and I feel for him.

miss.a.p1600
11-24-2015, 11:24 AM
Lol @ never stick your d*ck in crazy! Also never let a nothing a$$ dude penetrate.

Well at least everyone here could express their views and opinions (even though we may have to agree to disagree on some topics) without anyone going overboard and attacking or the thread getting locked so ... Success for the thread.

Plus this is really enlightening on the laws regarding marriage/divorce/parenting rights/fertility/etc.

And hopefully the family in this case comes to some reasonable agreement.

miss.a.p1600
11-24-2015, 11:28 AM
Let's say she had the baby. There's a big chance this kid would want to know who the biological father is, even if he/she grew up with a good father figure. It's natural wanting to know. That biological parent is gonna be douchebag to that child bc he didn't agree to be a parent. So this man would be considered d-bag for agreeing or disagreeing being the biological....he can't win. I find that unfair too. It would emotionally sting for that child. That child is always going to ask why this and that.

Totally valid and I thought about that further up thread.

I would think of it like a closed adoption. Some kids don't want to know who their bio parent is. All they know or care to know is the parent(s) that raised them.

If I signed over my rights I think I would be okay with the kids meeting me if he or she wanted to as an adult and I would have to explain the decision I made at the time (how the ex coerced me into conception, I wasn't able to co-parent, etc) then I would ask for forgiveness and try to build a relationship from there if the kid/now adult was okay with that. Would probably do family therapy too.

Issabelle
11-24-2015, 11:30 AM
Lol @ never stick your d*ck in crazy! Also never let a nothing a$$ dude penetrate.

Well at least everyone here could express their views and opinions (even though we may have to agree to disagree on some topics) without anyone going overboard and attacking or the thread getting locked so ... Success for the thread.

Plus this is really enlightening on the laws regarding marriage/divorce/parenting rights/fertility/etc.

And hopefully the family in this case comes to some reasonable agreement.

Double thumbs up for not getting locked. There's been enough of that over on my preferred lurk-spot of the forum lately.

Reproductive rights are always an interesting discussion for me. As a woman, I have to acknowledge that I tend to receive priority in reproductive decisions based both on tradition and the more logical aspects of physical burden (well, these days anyway--I don't wanna talk about any time proceeding the last century). Anytime two individuals disagree over a shared situation things have the potential to get sticky. Add in bodily autonomy, biological relations, and emotionally charged subjects and you end up with one hell of a potential storm brewing. Basically, legality, morality, and ethics all in one can be quite the brain teaser.

And yes, hopefully a resolution can be reached that both parties are happy with. Unfortunately, I don't know that I can see it happening in this case, but it would be very good if they were able to.

Issabelle
11-24-2015, 11:33 AM
Totally valid and I thought about that further up thread.

I would think of it like a closed adoption. Some kids don't want to know who their bio parent is. All they know or care to know is the parent(s) that raised them.

Oh, that one's a tough-y though, because you can't tell in advance which way the kid is going to go. My goddaughter's mother is a deadbeat drug abuser who neglected her kids until the biological father took custody of the child that was his. Her new 'mom' is my best friend and she has never questioned that my bff is her 'real' mother and also has no desire to ever get to know her biological mother.

My niece, on the other hand, has a dead beat dad who has literally not seen her since she was a newborn and hasn't contacted her since before her first birthday. Baby girl wants to know where her daddy is because there a) isn't another father figure (plenty of uncles/grandpas, but not a father figure) and b) she's just curious and wants a relationship with him.

You can't assume it's going to be like a closed adoption when the only person who can decide if it's a closed or open ended question is the child themselves, and he/she won't be able to do that until long after they come into the world.

Dominic.2
11-24-2015, 11:41 AM
Let's say she had the baby. There's a big chance this kid would want to know who the biological father is… That biological parent is gonna be douchebag to that child bc he didn't agree to be a parent. …It would emotionally sting for that child. That child is always going to ask why this and that.

For me personally, I care more about the emotional well-being of the child than my need to be a parent. I've witnessed someone throughout the years wondering about the biological he never met, and I feel for him.

I know the portion hits close to home and it is kind of who I am. That portion on my birth certificate where the father's name should be, for me read in all caps, DECLINES TO STATE. For years I wondered mine was different than everyone else. It used to really bother me.

Except in my case we were able to track him down. The meeting was wholly unfulfilling. I decided I didn't want a relationship with him and he served no purpose in my life. It no longer bothers me. So I see where Vyanka is coming from.

I found myself lurking in this thread, secretly siding with the embryos. ;)

(Thanks for the thanks 'votes.' It feels good. Sadly, it just dawned on me why I am here every day. I think I'm looking for approval from anonymous strippers. I seriously need to log off now.)

oldster
11-24-2015, 12:33 PM
I think some here are making a lot of assumptions about the guys motivations with zero evidence.

He has stated he would be involved with the kid, because it is his kid, why assume it would be out of guilt? Why not assume it is because it is his kid and he would love and adore it? What because men don't love their kids?

Cancer is an equal opportunity destroyer, it attacks kind wonderful people and raving lunatics alike. why the assumption that everything she says is true, and that she is virtuous and kind?


Maybe he knows her better than any of us, and after being married for 3 years he knows she would be a crazy ass horrible mother, and he wants better for his kids.

The 3 rulings in favor of women who it represented their only chance to procreate is bad law. It may make you feel warm and fuzzy, but they are bad decisions that will come back to bite in ways that are not yet clear.

There is no 'right' to procreate, many are unable from the start

Most do not have the ability, technically or financially to have eggs stored

They either adopt or find some other way to fulfillment

Overturning a legal contract, which no one has found was signed under duress and forcing a man to be a parent against his will is so much a stronger legal issue than one woman not having her biological child that it boggles the mind that any jurist could find otherwise.

I will again remind the ladies here that having children one does not want has long been an issue for women, and because in this case the complainant is male it makes the case no different, and mark my words it would have far more negative repercussions for women if it were to be ruled the other way

The law is not a moral code, it is only the law

Issabelle
11-24-2015, 01:07 PM
^^ I see a lotta truth up there from oldster.

I know men who love their kids far more than the mother.

I know people who were such assholes that I couldn't even feel bad when they were diagnosed with a major disease like cancer (and, trust me here, it takes one hell of a person to make me admit that out loud) or could put up the act of a good parent in public but treated their children like total shit in private.

Vision of the future in one of those three states where a woman was given the right to procreate as it was her only chance at biological children: a man who is virtually infertile/becomes infertile manages to impregnate a woman who does not want to carry the child to term; there is now a precedent in place to say that she cannot abort as she is preventing his right to biological offspring as he is statistically medically unlikely to be able to conceive a biological child ever again.

No, the right to procreate does not exist, or everyone would be able to have children of their own. I have a relative who is the best mother on earth and she had to adopt due to fertility issues. Didn't stop her from loving her son OR feeling like a 'real' parent with a connection to her child.

Contract = contract, yes. The consequences may suck, but if you signed on knowing full well what they were, you don't get to change your mind. If you didn't like the terms or weren't willing to live with them if they came into play, you should have renegotiated or, I dunno, not signed in the first place. Failure to read the fine print when an attorney tells you it's legally binding isn't gonna fly here. If a doctor/attorney medically misled her, then there is a case for insufficient information to invalidate the contract medically, yet that wouldn't change that the ex-husband isn't currently legally obligated to allow her to implant those embryos so long as he upheld his portion of the contract in good faith. A lot of 'if's that still yield a sticky situation.

Yeah, the 'far more negative repercussions' argument is a vague allusion to the world of yester-year where women weren't permitted to terminate pregnancy or give up their rights to the child without explicit permission from the father and/or the state AND if they weren't granted then the child was still the responsibility of the mother both to care for and to provide for financially. I'm not interested in living in a world where that could happen to me, personally. Safe sex is great, but birth control fails and I don't want to be in that situation and stuck.

Yeah, the law isn't moral or immoral. It's amoral, meaning it exists outside the realms of morality altogether. Sort of the point, go figure, annoying though it can be for many of us in shitty situations going up against it.

lemiwinks31
11-24-2015, 04:22 PM
Lots of good points.

I would just add that nobody is saying she cant be a mother. Their are plenty of unwanted kids in this world who need a loving parent.

As far as her only wanting to be a 'biological' mother, well, there are millions of women who cant reproduce for a variety of reasons, she is now one of them.

I agree with most of you, she(and he) signed an agreement which could be terminated by either party in the event of divorce. ie..saying we agree to do this, but we are going to do it together, if not, either of us can put an end to it. He did.