Have I wandered into the Daily Mail comments by mistake?
My wife and I wanted to start a family about 24 years ago,we had a boy who is much loved.When we decided to have another child my wife had several miscarriages,so we had a long discussion about fertility treatment vs adoption and decided to adopt.Our second child ,who we adopted at 23 months,died in an RTA just before he was 3,after a very intense and fulfilling year,,and about 2 years later we adopted a girl,just before her first birthday.She is much loved,and has a life history book,explaining why she was adopted,and why she came to us.She is now 15 and a proper little madam,and very much loved.She knows why she was adopted,and at some time may go in search of her birth mother,but has no doubts about who mum and dad are.I hope Tom and his partner have adopted,but would understand if they went for surrogacy, as long as they care for and cherish the child then they should be ok.The same sex relationship is irrelevant to the the child,and should be to the rest of us.
From the BBC;
They have not revealed any more details about the pregnancy, including whether or not a surrogate is involved.
If a surrogate isn't involved I think medical science needs to know.
Ah the Telegraph that peer reviewed journal. Also non-paternity can obviously be know and unknown. Here technically (although not legally) between the child - Tom and Dustin there will be non-paternity.
Plenty of papers out there reporting on non-paternity rates. eg.
Pedigree and genotyping quality analyses of over 10,000 DNA samples from the Generation Scotland: Scottish Family Health Study. Kerr et al. BMC Medical Genetics. 2013.
Not sure if I'm reading this right but from that article:
"A total of 925 parent-child trios were assessed for transmission of the SNP markers, with 16 trios indicating evidence of inconsistency in the recorded pedigrees."
Is 1.7% (and without going into the statistical significance of that sample, let's say it's the same as the 2% quoted in the other).
Three of them were the mum (presumably adopted but they didn't tell the researchers? Or an actual mix up!).
It does acknowledge that the sample was self selecting though, mum's may not have volunteered if they knew it wasn't the dad's.
Ah the Telegraph that peer reviewed journal.
Larmuseau, Maarten H.D. et al.Cuckolded Fathers Rare in Human Populations, Trends in Ecology & Evolution , Volume 31 , Issue 5 , 327 - 329
I can't imagine why anyone would go to this length to have a baby...horrid things...but good luck to them same as any couple who do have paternal feelings and can't conceive alone.
Good luck to them. Him and his husband seem like good guys.
But that child is biologically hers. If it was me I would want to know who my mother was, where I came from, what made me, me. etc.
Did I miss the bit where they said the mother's identity would be kept secret from the child?
Did bikerbouy leave out and apostrophe or an 'S' ? : "Tunnocks Wafers and a Double Espresso" More than one Tunnock wafer with an expresso (double or otherwise) is truly an antisocial faux pas.
Good luck to them.
in other news, are the remnants of UKIP logging in here by mistake?
There’s too much about the story that hasn’t been disclosed to really comment but to answer why anyone should care, well you could say the same thing about any challenging issue in society – why should I care about people who are racist? It doesn’t affect me. Why should I care about an aid worker who sleeps with prostitutes? It doesn’t affect me.
Saying it doesn’t affect you and therefore you have no right to comment, ask, debate etc is at best pathetic and at worst veiled bigotry.
Besides the happy couple decided to publically announce it to the world in a way that demands we debate it. That makes it a public news story and since it’s an important issue, we should debate. Asking the question as the OP did does NOT make him a bigot of any kind. The only bigots on this thread are the ones accusing him or her of that without first thinking more carefully about the intent of the question and presuming to believe it;s motivated by something other than genuine interest; when you presuppose to know something about another person without really knowing it, that right there is bigotry and there are a lot of people on here guilty of that (which by the way also makes you hypocrites).
Speaking as a father an atheist and a bisexual man, I am however thrilled by the idea that we are now tolerant enough as a society to know that your sexual preference for men and/or women is irrelevant to your ability to be a good parent. But I am also utterly disappointed that we also seem to be classing our biological origin and the notion of mother and father as similarly irrelevant. It’s not; it’s all we have, it’s who we are and you only have to talk to people who were adopted to see that many of them struggle with the notion that they were given up or wonder who their ‘real’ i.e. their biological parents are/were. That search for identity is hard wired into us and the parental instinct to nurture and care for our own off spring, is kind of important evolutionarily speaking. Adoption cases are both a triumph and a tragedy of society just as are good examples and bad examples of parenting.
If someone contracts someone to be nothing more than a surrogate then that’s deeply troubling for me and for a lot of other people and that doesn’t make us bigots, that just makes us human. A lot of people also feel troubled by the idea of egg or sperm donation as is clearly evidenced by the fact that sperm donation has, if you pardon the pun, dried up since we made it a legal right for a child to know who their biological father is.
If the biological mother is going to be involved then that sounds to me like a fabulous outcome all round; they get three great parents not just two and that has to be a good thing. If however you’re going to deliberately engineer a child so that one of those two parents is specifically excluded, then I personally think that’s very wrong. Maybe we allow it in society but that doesn’t mean that people aren’t going to judge you by your actions.
This thread isn’t about the rights and wrongs of surrogacy, it’s the OPs discomfort with same sex parents to a child.
I suggest you go back and re read my op.
Well said, geetee...
If someone contracts someone to be nothing more than a surrogate then that’s deeply troubling for me and for a lot of other people and that doesn’t make us bigots, that just makes us human.
And it makes some of you human bigots.
tonyg2003BTW Non paternity in the UK is 9% not 1:50.
that figure sounds a bit high, where's it from?
Did bikerbouy leave out and apostrophe or an ‘S’ ? : “Tunnocks Wafers and a Double Espresso” More than one Tunnock wafer with an expresso (double or otherwise) is truly an antisocial faux pas.
I had two Tunnocks Wafers and one espresso (not a double) whilst sitting back and reading some of the comments on here..
I think some people believe we live in the 1950's... or they're just used to looking backwards.
And it makes some of you human bigots
How so?
i previously heard the figure for non paternity was 25% which sounds crazy. It’s prevalence doesn’t make it right of course. It’s deeply wrong.
Think the term bigot is being bandied about far to readily. It has to still be ok to have a different opinion without being challenged on it or encouraging debate. Different opinion doesn't necessarily mean intolerant.
My eldest, (& gay) son & his partner have just adopted a rescue greyhound (dog, not bus)
Is that the same?
(there's probably a new word to be used for 'gay' I suppose but I can't keep up, unless 'homosexual' is still ok)
My eldest, (& gay) son & his partner have just adopted a rescue greyhound (dog, not bus)
Is that the same?
Its now a "Gayhound"
As for the new baby, have met a lot of straight couples and some are suitable for children, some should never ever be allowed to have had a baby or babies.
As fior gay or lesbian das or mums, they seem to be affluent, well spoken, well educated and have a positive outlook on life, and willing to help everyone, something that is important to all new born babies and children till they reach adulthood
I think it's great news! Even moreso that it gets up the nose of the OP and the rest of the Stasi.:)
I think it’s great news! Even moreso that it gets up the nose of the OP and the rest of the Stasi.:)
Ah so you're one of those bigots who presupposes to know what is in the OP's mind?
Non paternity 9%? Seems too high. Source?
2% according to the Telegraph.
Ah so you’re one of those bigots who presupposes to know what is in the OP’s mind?
i like to consider it more an educated guess based on my weary experience of the internet.
start of a contentious subject, fail to state your position but leave enough abiguity in there that it could go either way depending on the mood of the forum. It’s hardly new
Being a dad isn't a biological function
"MrPottatoHead
Think the term bigot is being bandied about far to readily. It has to still be ok to have a different opinion without being challenged on it or encouraging debate. Different opinion doesn’t necessarily mean intolerant."
Honestly it seems to be a trigger word, like "ignorant", where people who express views that are by definition bigoted, can't stand to be called bigoted. I think there's a disconnect, people see "bigoted" as being a <bad> opinion and obviously their opinions aren't bad.
Cambridge:
"a person who has strong, unreasonable beliefs and who does not like other people who have different beliefs or a different way of life"
While there may be a few suspect comments in this thread i dont believe I as the op have said anything that can be classed as bigoted. I have only raised an moral and ethical question to the forum for debate. Not once have i said anything derogatory against lgbt s or any other group. The only personal view i have expressed was to question surrogacy.
This and the Golliwog thread all in one day!! We really are being spoilt 🤗 who said the forum was dying?
Yes, it does seem to still have its quota of bigoted ****s.
Congrats to Tom and his partner.
OP - how does this affect you?
Think the term bigot is being bandied about far to readily
Perhaps. Perhaps not.
Though if anyone feels it's being bandied in their direction a bit too much then maybe evaluate why that might be. Same goes or racist / xenophobe / sexist.
Good for the two of them; I hope they stay together in a close and loving relationship and are fully supportive of the child.
As for which of them fertilised the egg - and is, therefore, in strict biological terms the father - who cares.
I’d say he’s too young. Get out and live a bit more.
I agree, yes, Tom Daley has definitely lead a sheltered and unfulfilling life, and we're definitely in a position to tell him when he is ready to have children.
Live and let live. Good luck to them, congratulations, etc.
While there may be a few suspect comments in this thread i dont believe I as the op have said anything that can be classed as bigoted. I have only raised an moral and ethical question to the forum for debate. Not once have i said anything derogatory against lgbt s or any other group. The only personal view i have expressed was to question surrogacy.
here’s a top tip, if you’re going to kick off a subject like this why not state your position or lack of one clearly rather than making a vague statement with the insinuation that you’re not ok with it? You obviously felt strongly enough about it to start a conversation, and in the absence of any positive comment it’s ok for us to assume you have a problem with them, right?
we also seem to be classing our biological origin and the notion of mother and father as similarly irrelevant. It’s not; it’s all we have, it’s who we are and you only have to talk to people who were adopted to see that many of them struggle with the notion that they were given up or wonder who their ‘real’ i.e. their biological parents are/were. That search for identity is hard wired into us and the parental instinct to nurture and care for our own off spring, is kind of important evolutionarily speaking
Is this all just made up? Do you actually go around talking to adopted people about this? Seems a strange thing to do? Do you have the same discussions with people who are not adopted? And all that stuff about 'hard wiring' what do you actually mean?
By viewing it as morally or ethically questionable, you have already outed yourselfI have only raised an moral and ethical question to the forum for debate.
As geetee says.
Tom and his husband were interviewed at the American Football match they had in London a few months ago. It's amazing the progress that has been made to attitudes that the most shocking thing about the interview was that Tom and his husband supported different teams.
Good luck to them.
And maybe bigotry is bandied about too much, but to question whether or not Daley can be a dad, just because he is in a same sex relationship? Pretty clear case of it there!
with an expresso
The ironing!
And maybe bigotry is bandied about too much, but to question whether or not Daley can be a dad, just because he is in a same sex relationship? Pretty clear case of it there!
BS! The title of the thread eludes to the fact that only one person in that relationship can be the biological father and it is not stated in the news reports who it is and quite frankly I don't care. You could say it isn't any of my business. But then as Geetee said, if you are going to publicise this in the way they have then they are expecting it to raise debate.
If you bothered to read anything else in the thread, you will see that I have no problem with same sex parents. The only thing I find questionable is surrogacy, and I don't believe that makes me a bigot. I would question it no matter the sex of the couple involved.
Agreed, I could of posted the op in a different way, but I was started a debate and not making a personal statement of fact.
we also seem to be classing our biological origin and the notion of mother and father as similarly irrelevant. It’s not; it’s all we have, it’s who we are and you only have to talk to people who were adopted to see that many of them struggle with the notion that they were given up or wonder who their ‘real’ i.e. their biological parents are/were. That search for identity is hard wired into us and the parental instinct to nurture and care for our own off spring, is kind of important evolutionarily speaking
Is this all just made up? Do you actually go around talking to adopted people about this? Seems a strange thing to do? Do you have the same discussions with people who are not adopted? And all that stuff about ‘hard wiring’ what do you actually mean?
As an aside and oddly enough I have had such a conversation an wot goatee1972 says was pretty much the gist of it.
(and no I don't go around asking if people are adopted.:-)
If you bothered to read anything else in the thread, you will see that I have no problem with same sex parents
I did, the first thing you asked for was a debate on the ins and outs of same sex parenting.
If your issue was surrogacy, you should have asked that question.
I did, the first thing you asked for was a debate on the ins and outs of same sex parenting.
If your issue was surrogacy, you should have asked that question.
And at what point did I say I had a problem with it? I was just putting the subject on the table for discussion. If you want to know my personal view then I will tell you. I have no problem with homosexual relationships. I have no problem with same sex parenting. I do question the subject of surrogacy.
So you wanted to know everyone’s option but weren’t prepared to share yours? Sounds plausible...
so how can you be ok with same sex parenting but not surrogacy? What are the terms that make it acceptable to you?
So you wanted to know everyone’s option but weren’t prepared to share yours? Sounds plausible…
I just did
so how can you be ok with same sex parenting but not surrogacy? What are the terms that make it acceptable to you?
Adoption.
only one person in that relationship can be the biological father and it is not stated in the news reports who it is
I assumed they'd both **** into the same beaker (test tube?) and give it a good old shake up. Then there would always be an element of uncertainty over the biological father.
@trailwagger - have you ever been in the position where you had to make the decision between having no children, fostering, adopting, IVF or surrogacy?