Genetic Orphans Seek Their Rights
by American Phoenix | August 22, 2010
Contrary to the politically correct notion that eliminating a parent of either gender will not harm children, children born through the process of gamete donation, i.e., through obtaining sperm or ova from a bank and then artificially inseminating, are speaking out. Their voices, the voices of the most powerless, have largely not been heard - or they have been deliberately ignored - in the ongoing cultural debate on “homosexual marriage”.
Genetic orphans, as these children are called, are now suing to obtain the right to know the identity and history of their genetic parents. A class action lawsuit is currently ongoing in British Columbia, Canada, and is expected to go to trial this year:
Olivia Pratten filed the proposed class action in B.C. Supreme Court, claiming that the records relating to the identity of the biological parents of an adopted person are preserved, but the records relating to a gamete donor are only required to be preserved for six years.
Once destroyed, a person born by way of a donor cannot get the medical or social history of a donor, and cannot learn crucial components of their identity such as racial, cultural, religious and linguistic history, which may cause psychological distress, the legal action claims.
“The information in the donor records could one day be vital to Olivia’s health,” the court document says.
“If the donor records are lost or destroyed, that information will be lost for all time and Olivia’s health and safety could be compromised as a result.”
Pratten, who seeks to have donor records preserved permanently, also seeks to know the identity of her biological father.
“That knowledge would alleviate the psychological distress that Olivia experiences in not knowing her biological origins,” the legal action states.
“The differential treatment imposes a disadvantage on the plaintiff and class members, in comparison with those people who are adopted,” the court document says.
“Many of the members of the class were conceived by gamete donation because of the physical disability of one of their parents which resulted in his or her infertility,” the statement of claim says.
The legal action states those conceived by gamete donation are discriminated against, violating protections enshrined under Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Hall, Neal, Daughter of Sperm Donor Seeks to Know Identity of Biological Father, Vancouver Sun, Monday, October 27, 2008.
Since 2005, when the United Kingdom changed its law to prohibit donor anonymity, the numbers of sperm donors have dropped by 40%, from a high of 500. Sperm banks in the United Kingdom are now suffering a shortage of sperm. Dr. Laura puts it best:
Obviously, the men were anonymously donating sperm for the financial compensation, and not for the purpose of fatherhood. Once the anonymity factor was gone, motivation declined as these men likely felt threatened by potential future responsibilities to a child they had no intention of taking any responsibility for; either financially or emotionally.
Schlessinger, Dr. Laura, Sperm Donors No Longer Anonymous in Britain, November 17, 2008
At the same time, the United Kingdom capped the number of children that can be produced using one man’s sperm.
The United Kingdom legislation governing in vitro fertilization (IVF) is currently under review. According to Baroness Deech, former chair of the UK Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, “the issue that uncovered the deepest feelings in the evidence received by the parliamentary scrutiny committee is the rather mild provision in Section 13(5) of the 1990 Human Fertilisation and Embryology (HFE) Act that ‘a woman shall not be provided with treatment services unless account has been taken of the welfare of any child who may be born as a result of the treatment (including the need of that child for a father)’. The Government proposes to remove that requirement.” One likely reason promoting that change becomes apparent when we learn, as journalist Nicole Martin reports in the London Telegraph, that “lesbians and single women are on course to become the largest group to have donor insemination. If the upward trend continues, which fertility experts predict, most children born through donated sperm could be fatherless within the next few years.” Ironically, at the same time, the recent prohibition in the UK of donor anonymity has created a shortage of men willing to donate sperm and conflicts with the wishes of women, including lesbian and single mothers, who do not want their child’s father to be identifiable or involved in any way with the child.
Recently, a growing number of these children, who are now adults – they call themselves “donor conceived adults” — have been speaking out forcefully against the way in which they were “brought into being.” And, contrary to breezy dismissals of the importance of genetic relationship, they are telling us it’s very important to them. They describe feelings of multiple losses as a result of being “genetic orphans.” Their feelings mirror those of many adult adoptees who have spoken poignantly about the loss of genetic kinship inherent in adoption and who have lobbied hard and largely successfully to open adoption records in Canada. It is one matter, ethically, when children are not reared by their biological parents in their biological family because of accidental circumstances or as a result of entirely private action. It is quite another when that outcome is deliberately planned and society, through its support, funding, institutions, and public and social policies, is complicit in its realization.
Director, Southeastern Fertility Center and National Embryo Donation Center and CMDA Member Jeffrey A. Keenan, MD, HCLD: “This article points out the very real moral/ethical problems inherent in today’s assisted reproductive technologies and the extremes to which they can be (mis)used. It further highlights the continued progression of liberal thought that is sweeping developed countries with regard to parentage and family structure. It seems that the age old moral grounds of ‘the best interest of the child’ is being replaced by political correctness and some in the gay and lesbian population. While this article focuses on lesbians undergoing insemination, there is a similar problem in the growing movement among gay male couples to obtain children by surrogacy, with the surrogate mother providing the egg or through third party egg donation.
“What would have been thought unconscionable 20 years ago not only is commonly accepted today, but is actually being advocated by major medical societies. In fact, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine has recently published two articles which strongly imply discrimination or unethical behavior in clinics who do not assist gay or lesbian couples in their quest to have children.
Genetic Orphans, Christian Medical & Dental Associations, September 18, 2007, (reprinted from MercatorNet)
Does this actually serve the best interests of the children? I think the children themselves are making a strong case that it does not. David Blankenhorn of the Danish Institute for Human Rights, makes a convincing argument that the children’s rights should be protected by the law:
1. Every child has the right, in so far as society can make it possible, to know and be raised by its two natural biological parents, except when it is contrary to the child’s best interests. The implication of this right is that society should recognize and support the institution of marriage, since marriage is our only social institution that seeks fully to unite, in the persons of the spouses, the biological, social, and legal dimensions of parenthood. The great good and goal of marriage is to give to each child the gift of the two persons who brought the child into the world. For this reason, marriage is society’s most pro-child social institution and probably ultimately society’s single most important protector and guarantor of the rights of children.
2. Every child has the right to a natural biological heritage, defined as the union of the father’s sperm and the mother’s egg. Society should typically refrain from actions that would efface or deny the child’s natural biological heritage, or what the French philosopher Sylvianne Agacinski calls the child’s double origin.
3. Every child has the right to know his or her biological origins. Individuals and society should typically refrain from creating genetic orphans, or children who do not and can not know their natural origins.
4. Children have the right to be heard.
Blankenhorn, David, The Rights of Children and the Redefinition of Parenthood, June 2, 2005
So far, the children’s voices haven’t been heard and their rights have remained unprotected in the cultural free-for-all that seeks to redefine marriage, parenthood and the family. Could it be because there’s big money in gamete donation?
Topics: Adoption, Contraception, Culture of Death, Family, Homosexuality, International, Law | No Comments »
What’s That Smudge On Your Forehead?
by American Phoenix | February 17, 2010
Today, is Ash Wednesday, the dies cinerum, which marks the beginning of Lent in the Catholic Church.
Lent is the forty day period preceeding Easter, the Quadragesima, which is calculated to extend from Easter Sunday back for forty days, not including Sundays. Sundays are not included because they commemorate Christ’s resurrection. Why forty days? The forty days commemorate the significant “forty” periods in Scripture, including:
- The forty years the Jews wandered in the desert after they had been rescued by God from Egypt;
- Jonah preached to Nineveh that God’s judgment would come on them in forty days. During that time the people repented and thus were spared God’s judgment; and
- Jesus was tested by the Devil in the desert for forty days before He began His public ministry.
It is not an accident that these “forty” periods were times of prayer and repentence Lent is that time for Christians, during which they remember their sinfulness, fast, and do acts of penance as a recognition that God’s forgiveness came at the price of the death of His son Jesus Christ. It is our “forty” period. During this time, we are reminded that sin separates us from God. One doesn’t usually desire to be separate from the person one loves.
How did we come to receive the ashes? Ashes are a sign of mourning and repentence in Scripture, including the following passages:
- Jeremiah calls for repentence, "O daughter of my people, gird on sackcloth, roll in the ashes." (Jeremiah 6:26)
- After Absalom’s sister Tamar had been raped, she tore her tunic and put ashes on her head in her grief. "Tamar put ashes on her head and tore the long tunic in which she was clothed. Then putting her hands to her head, she went away crying loudly." (2 Sam. 13:19)
- When Joseph’s 11 brother’s told Jacob that he had been devoured by beasts, Jacob went into mourning and put on sackcloth and ashes. (Genesis 37:34)
- Daniel pleaded for God to rescue Israel with sackcloth and ashes as a sign of Israel’s repentance. "I turned to the Lord God, pleading in earnest prayer, with fasting, sackcloth and ashes." (Daniel 9:3)
- When Jonah told the Ninevites to repent: "When the news reached the king of Nineveh, he rose from his throne, laid aside his robe, covered himself with sackcloth, and sat in the ashes." (Jonah 3:6).
- Judith 4:11 "And all the Israelite men, women and children who lived in Jerusalem prostrated themselves in front of the temple building, with ashes strewn on their heads, displaying their sackcloth covering before the Lord." (See also 4:15 and 9:1).
- The Maccabees, Jewish rebels fighting for independence just prior to the New Testament period, prepared for battle using ashes. "That day they fasted and wore sackcloth; they sprinkled ashes on their heads and tore their clothes." (I Maccabees 3:47; see also 4:39).
- In the New Testament, Jesus also refers to the use of sackcloth and ashes as signs of repentance: "Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the mighty deeds done in your midst had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would long ago have repented in sackcloth and ashes." (Mt 11:21, Lk 10:13).
The history of Ash Wednesday is a bit obscure:
Despite all these references in Scripture, the use of ashes in the Church left only a few records in the first millennium of Church history. Thomas Talley, an expert on the history of the liturgical year, says that the first clearly datable liturgy for Ash Wednesday that provides for sprinkling ashes is in the Romano-Germanic pontifical of 960. Before that time, ashes had been used as a sign of admission to the Order of Penitents. As early as the sixth century, the Spanish Mozarabic rite calls for signing the forehead with ashes when admitting a gravely ill person to the Order of Penitents. At the beginning of the 11th century, Abbot Aelfric notes that it was customary for all the faithful to take part in a ceremony on the Wednesday before Lent that included the imposition of ashes. Near the end of that century, Pope Urban II called for the general use of ashes on that day. Only later did this day come to be called Ash Wednesday. 1
The Order of Penitents consisted of people who had committed a serious sin within the Christian community and who needed to repair their relationship with God before coming back to the Eucharist. During Lent, the penitents would repent for their sins and gain a fresh conversion. At the same time, the Order of the Catechumens, new converts to the faith, would be learning their catechism in preparation for the sacraments of baptism and confirmation. Like the catechumens who were preparing for Baptism, the penitents were often dismissed from the Sunday assembly after the Liturgy of the Word. The early church fathers saw serious sin after baptism as a sign that a person’s conversion was not complete, therefore penance was a second chance at a complete conversion. In this way, penance and baptism are essentially linked.
Lent developed in the Church as the whole community prayed and fasted for the catechumens who were preparing for Baptism. At the same time, those members of the community who were already baptized prepared to renew their baptismal promises at Easter, thus joining the catechumens in seeking to deepen their own conversion. It was natural, then, that the Order of Penitents also focused on Lent, with reconciliation often being celebrated on Holy Thursday so that the newly reconciled could share in the liturgies of the Triduum. With Lent clearly a season focused on Baptism, Penance found a home there as well. 1
Over time, we lost the Order of the Catechumens, and the emphasis shifted solely to penance even after the Order of Penitents was lost too. It wasn’t until Vatican II that the Order of Catechumens was resurrected and with it, much of the underlying meaning of Lent which connects penance to baptism.
For penance isn’t just about being wrong. It’s about a true metanoia - the Greek word for "repent" which is so much more aptly descriptive than the Latin. When I think of the word "repent" what often comes to mind is strange men on sidewalks wearing poster boards with apocalyptic messages, usually with "repent" written in big letters. But that’s not really what it’s about. Metanoia comes from two Greek words: "meta", meaning "change", and "noia" meaning "mind". Not in the sense that you change your mind about what you’re going to wear today. Metanoia is really about a change of innermost attitude. It’s about a conversion - a reversion, if you will - to our relationship with God. This is something that we, as Christians, are called to work on every day. And this is why when the ashes are placed upon our forehead, the priest says, "Turn away from sin and be faithful to the Gospels."
- Ash Wednesday: Our Shifting Understanding of Lent
- New Advent Catholic Encyclopaedia: Ash Wednesday
- EWTN: Lent
Topics: Catholic, Christianity, Lent, Prayer, Religion | No Comments »
The Real Saint Valentine
by American Phoenix | February 14, 2010
It’s February 14th again. Men are making dinner reservations, buying flowers and chocolate. Women are getting dressed up, applying make up, and putting up their hair. Some old rituals have even been blended with new ones: you can now do Valentine’s Day sudoku puzzles! It’s an annual ritual. But where did this ritual come from? And who was St. Valentine anyway?
There were several St. Valentine’s who could possibly be the origin of our current holiday. Two of them, one a priest and one a bishop, were both martyred by the Emperor Claudius II during the Roman empire when Christianity was persecuted. Another was a bishop in Africa about whom even less is known.
Our best guess is that Valentinus was a priest who lived during the reign of Claudius II. Claudius II was engaged in many unpopular wars and decided that his soldiers would fight better if they remained single, therefore, Claudius II banned marriage and cancelled all engagements. Valentinus assisted Christians during the persecutions and married couples despite the ban. For this he was apprehended and thrown into prison. When he refused to acknowledge Jupiter and Juno and renounce Jesus, he was sentenced to death, and executed on February 14th, 269.
It is said that the jailer, a man named Asterius, brought his blind daughter Julia to Valentinus, seeing that he was a man of learning, that she might have lessons while he was awaiting execution. In the course of her lessons, Julia’s sight was restored and both Julia and Asterius were converted to Christianity. This eventually resulted in both of their executions by Claudius II as well. According to legend, a pink almond tree, a symbol of abiding love, blossomed near St. Valentine’s grave. He made such an impression on Roman Christians that they erected a basilica at his burial place on the Flaminian Way.
The secular roots of St. Valentine’s Day lie in the ancient Roman festival of Lupercalia, which was celebrated on Feb. 15. For 800 years the Romans had dedicated this day to the god Lupercus. During this festival, a young man would draw the name of a young woman from a jar and would then keep the woman as a sexual companion for the year.
Pope Gelasius I was less than thrilled with this custom. He changed the lottery to have both young men and women draw the names of saints whom they would then emulate for the year. Instead of Lupercus, the patron of the feast became Valentinus. For Roman men, the day continued to be an occasion to seek the affections of women, and it became a tradition to give out handwritten messages of admiration that included Valentinus’ name.
In the 4th century Pope Julius I built a church in honor of Valentine. In the 7th century Pope Honorius I restored it and it became a very popular pilgrimage site. The confusion about the exact origins of St. Valentine’s day led the Roman Catholic Church to drop the holiday from its official calendar in 1969, although the holiday remains very popular.
Topics: Catechetics, Catholic, Christianity, Culture, History, Religion | No Comments »
A Propagation Meditation
by American Phoenix | February 4, 2010
I spent my Tuesday afternoon driving my college roommate, who became a nun with the Little Sisters of the Poor, to her family’s home in Stockton for her annual family visit. This is the one day out of the year where I get a good hour or two to have my own visit and I look forward to it. I’m always feted very well, because her parents love me with a home cooked Italian meal. Her dad is the only person who cooks eggplant that I will eat - besides my own mother. That’s about the highest food compliment possible, as eggplant is so NOT on my favorite food list. Her mother says she’s an atheist, but she goes to church every Sunday and prays to our Blessed Mother for intercession. We always disagree on politics, but she always listens to me because she knows that I will always give her a honest and truthful assessment of the state of “it” - whatever it is. I enjoy our friendly repartée. But I digress.
On the drive home, I tuned in Immaculate Heart Radio, KSFB, out of San Francisco, CA. I was then at the junction of Interstate 5 and Highway 4. I should say I tried to tune it in. The signal to noise ratio was quite low, and I could barely make out the voices that I heard. I knew it was Fr. Benedict Groeschel and that he was saying the rosary with another person, but that was about all I could make out. It reminded me of that passage in I Kings in which God speaks to Elijah in a whisper.
It struck me that this was almost a metaphor for life. How often do we try to tune in God? And even when we make the effort, how often do the many distractions in our lives act as noise - a distraction from the message? I strained to listen, despite the fact that I am undoubtedly spiritually lazy. I could hear enough of the rosary to say the responses at the right time, but only just barely.
It was raining as I drove home that night. It poured as I passed through Tracy. Oddly, during one of the cloud bursts, propagation all of a sudden got very clear (a higher signal to noise ratio) for a few moments. Then it was back to the background noise almost overwhelming the signal. Likewise, it is at those most difficult moments of life that God reaches us through our suffering, not in spite of it but because of it. For it is when we suffer that we more fully understand Christ’s suffering on the cross and His love for us.
As the distance between home and the source of KSFB’s signal decreased, the signal got stronger and more clear. I was able to hear the final prayers of the rosary without too much noise. Just as throughout life, one accumulates experiences, both spiritual and otherwise, that can allow one to better hone in on the “signal.” (Or take one further away, depending on how one interprets those experiences.)
Topics: Christianity, Prayer | No Comments »
News Of Inside the Studio
by American Phoenix | January 29, 2010
Rick Sanchez apparently hasn’t set foot outside of the studio. That’s a rather poor quality in a newsman.
Had he been outside of the studio, he might have noticed this:
He might have noticed the overwhelming numbers that continue to favor the pro-life cause. But as my friend Moonage opines,
Most of the polarization in this country is illustrated by CNN’s inability to report anything positive on a political position they can’t support. They can’t have two sides to any issue. That inability to accept what they don’t like is the problem in this country right now.
It’s an inability to deal with the truth - whether it be the truth that more people showed up in support of life, or whether it be the truth that abortion kills a human person. They simply can’t handle the truth. And that’s why I - and countless others - stopped watching CNN years ago.
I wasn’t at the Washington, DC March for Life, at which some 300,000 people walked. But I was at the San Francisco, CA Walk for Life West Coast. It has been reported that there were approximately 32,000 to 35,000 people at the San Francisco walk, while there were about 200 (I saw even less than that) pro-abortion protesters.
As usual, the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence were there with greasepainted faces streaked and runny from the rain. They really are a pathetic and tired old bunch, pushing condoms in our faces as if sex was the only thing worth living for.
There was a protester on a bicyle yelling “spaghetti brains” at the many young people in the march, and telling them to “grow up”. I heard not a single walker respond to his taunts. Just who was the “grown up”? And also a small band of protesters chanting “Keep your rosaries off our ovaries.” It’s not about rosaries - many of the marchers were Protestants who don’t pray the Rosary. Doubtless there were walkers of no particular faith who are nevertheless informed solely by science and reason that an unborn baby is a human being. It’s not about ovaries either, since the subject of concern - a human person with all of his or her genetic material - is already implanted in the uterus and well past the ovaries.
We walked on, unperturbed, in a line that must have stretched a solid mile. Along the way there was prayer, often there was music, and sometimes there was chanting, but it was never violent. We all wound up at the Marina Green, where there was food, music and many smiles - for at last, the sun had come out.
Topics: Abortion, California, Culture of Death, Family, Law, Politics | No Comments »
« Previous Entries