Your Comments

  • Send Us an E-mail
    Comments for our bloggers may be sent by clicking the link above. Comments can be posted to the blogs themselves by clicking the comments link following each blog.
Syndicate (Full Text) XML

Syndicate (Excerpt) XML



WWW Mere Comments


Summit Ministries






« If You Eat Him, More Will Come? | Main | Bono & Trobisch »

August 23, 2005

My Two Moms

We could all see this story from California coming, and it points out the perverseness of both our imagination and our accepted reproductive technologies--perverse in the sense of convuluted and twisted. Try this thought experiment I just made up:

Dear Abby:
Mother's Day is coming up and I want to take my mother out for a nice lunch. Only I have to decide: Melissa was the one who gave birth to me in the hospital 24 years ago, and she nursed me (though I don't remember any of this). My other mom, Sally, the woman with whom my mother lived and also who took care of me; in fact, she was the one who drove me to my first day of school and was home much more often than Melissa, who made lots of money but had to work downtown at a law firm to do it. Now Melissa and Sally aren't speaking to each other anymore; and I can't mention the name of one in the presence of the other. The last time I mentioned Melissa to Sally, I was told that Sally gave the egg that turned into me, so I was really Sally's son, not Melissa's. I asked Melissa about this, and she told me it was all true, but that Sally didn't  really do very much and that she, Melissa, put up with morning sickness and nine months of pregnancy, which almost cost her her career, and a very difficult birth (C-section), plus nursing for a month. I want to have lunch with Melissa and Sally, but I can't since they won't see me together and are only free at the same time. Melissa has other plans later in the day and Sally won't be free later because she is celebrating Mother's Day with her other two children, in vitro children, she had several years after she broke up with Melissa. What should I do? I can't ask my Dad; he was never married and gave the lab a little shot of his stuff so Sally's egg could be planted in Melissa; later he died of AIDS. Two years ago I joined a synagogue, the first time I have ever been involved in religion. I means a lot to me now. I learned I am supposed to "honor my mother and father," but how can I? I am not sure who is my real mom or what that word even means anymore. What should I do?

--Confused in Fresno

Posted by James M. Kushiner at 10:42 AM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/234392/3050137

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference My Two Moms:

Comments

Sounds like a Yale frat boy with 15 minutes to kill came up with this . . .

Posted by: beloml | Aug 23, 2005 11:01:45 AM

I think the letter makes a powerful point and unfortunately represents the kind of dilemna that too many people will have in generations to come. BTW, I'd be delighted were a Yale frat boy to prove so wise!

Posted by: Hannah | Aug 23, 2005 11:08:28 AM

The "died of AIDS" part is a little over the top ... I don't see how it supports the scenario.

Otherwise, yes, this kind of situation is being deliberately created.

Posted by: holmegm | Aug 23, 2005 11:53:40 AM

Actually, the frat boy comment's a good point. How is it that policies any old schmoe - even a bored frat boy - could easily find the folly in, in fifteen spare minutes...still become the law of the land?

Posted by: Joe Long | Aug 23, 2005 2:06:57 PM

Of course, Abby is forever getting questions about the etiquette related to parents and stepparents, not to mention biological and adoptive parents - does that mean it was a mistake to legalize remarriage after divorce or to legalize adoption? I know a lot of families whose holidays are complicated by connections with step-relations on both sides, and I know heterosexual Christians on their third and fourth marriages. I doubt, though, that Christians who disapprove of divorce would suggest (a) that it should be illegal or (b) that estranged parents shouldn't be responsible for child support.

(Re: the "Yale frat boy" comment, are we thinking of the one currently vacationing in Crawford?)

Posted by: Juli | Aug 23, 2005 3:18:02 PM

I knew the post would raise the issue of the painful dilemmas faced by those who have divorced parents, even unto the third and fourth time. I have seen the pain in these situations. Sometimes weddings can provide uniquely awkward situations. Yes, families in general are messy, as they are in the Bible. Divorce has long become common. Divorce laws are not kid-friendly, though some try to be, and in some cases were perhaps based on false assumptions about how well children can cope. They need to be reconsidered, reformed. I think such means (as in the story) of having children in the first place should be abandoned as unwise, not that the child in this particular case should not receive support (I haven't looked at those details, and don't need to raise the question).

I included the AIDs not to go over the top, but to remind readers of scenarios that I have read about--the male donor being a homosexual man. The death from AIDs (all too common) removed the only possible father from the reach of the letter writer. I wanted to include the issue of a missing father in his life.

Thanks.

Posted by: Jim Kushiner | Aug 23, 2005 3:38:22 PM

Jim's right about the donor: a disproportionate number (not a majority?) of such are homosexuals. Why that is the case admits of some psychological speculation, but one obvious connection is that if you do one unnatural thing all the time, you'll probably be more likely to do others too.

To Juli: We're not good enough now to have divorce made illegal. But certainly it should be hedged around with all kinds of penalties, legal and social, to protect both those who might be tempted, and those who might be hurt by the fecklessness of bad spouses. I am told that by far the great majority of divorces occur for reasons far below the oft-cited physical abuse.

Divorce is a terrible evil, but Jim is talking about a host of things that are deeply unnatural, too. It's the difference between desiring a naturally good thing but in the wrong way or under the wrong circumstances, and desiring what is in itself perverse. The latter teeters on the verge of blasphemy: we deny the created forms of our own bodies.

Posted by: Tony | Aug 23, 2005 5:02:19 PM

"Jim's right about the donor: a disproportionate number (not a majority?) of such are homosexuals. Why that is the case admits of some psychological speculation, but one obvious connection is that if you do one unnatural thing all the time, you'll probably be more likely to do others too."

I think one explanation is that gay donors want the satisfaction of having fathered children, but do not want to go through the natural eex act.

On a note similar to Kushiner's post, I should mention that, last year, a lesbian couple in Ontario, Canada asked a family court to declare the father of their child (who was the donor) a legal, third parent.

Posted by: Clement | Aug 23, 2005 5:45:57 PM

Tony:
>Jim's right about the donor: a disproportionate
>number (not a majority?) of such are homosexuals.

I never knew that ... makes sense now.

Clement:
>On a note similar to Kushiner's post, I should
>mention that, last year, a lesbian couple in
>Ontario, Canada asked a family court to declare
>the father of their child (who was the donor) a
>legal, third parent.

Which raises interesting issues ... if he later
reconsiders, must he pay child support?

Posted by: holmegm | Aug 24, 2005 4:35:57 AM

At the risk of rocks ...

In my experience, homosexual fathers and wannabes view human children as pets. One of my longtime best buddies, a homosexual, always comments when 'round my kids: "I want one". (He loves cats. Were I a cat, I want him as my "Dad".)

Another, father of four, feeds 'em, pets 'em, praises 'em, chastises 'em, pays for 'em, leaves 'em; wife raises them. He's proud to say he has a wife and four kids. Yet sadly, he's failed to be a *father* (and a husband) -- which is played out over and over.

This is to say, I believe the homosexual sperm donor is willing to bring more pets into the world. Because, whatever the cause, this is the relationship with which he is most familiar.

Just a thought.

Posted by: Fr Joseph Huneycutt | Aug 24, 2005 7:14:05 AM

Post a comment