Am I at risk of becoming a first wife?

[_truth dancer]

Hi Danna,

This child, has a family; a father and a mother; grandparents, relatives, cousins, aunts and uncles, and community. A divorce does not take away parenthood nor does it mean a child is abandoned.

Hopefully the father will remain an active parent. If not, and in the likely event the mother remarries, her child will have a step father. If there is never a step-father, this woman will raise her child with extended family and loved ones.

I put a sperm donor in the same category as a blood donor; not a true bio dad, not a bio father, not a dad or father in any sense of the term; a sperm donor. Period.

A blood donor does not feel a responsibility to financially and emotionally support an accident victim who used her/his blood, nor should a sperm donor think of his contribution as anything more than providing a substance needed for life. It is a lovely gift that remains anonymous.

There are valid reasons blood donors do not know to whom their blood is given.

:-)

~td~

[_Sethbag]

Here's another angle.

First, I'm not a lawyer. At all. I took the LSAT several years ago, but I never attended even a single day of law school. I don't even play one on TV.

Second, I'm not in New Zealand, and know nothing at all about New Zealand law except for the assumption that it will share a common British Common Law heritage with US law.

Third, I'm probably off in my facts even with regards to US law.

In the US, most if not all states have laws that dictate that the husband of a woman who gives birth is presumptively the child's father, and gets all the fatherly rights. A case I read about in the last few years was brought by a guy who impregnated a woman during an extramarital affair. She then reconciled with her husband, and locked the bio-father out of the child's life. And the bio-father has no parental rights whatsoever. The "married to the mother at time of birth" dad has all of the rights, and all of the obligations.

If a woman bears a child without being married, the bio-dad will be on the hook. I don't know enough about the law to know how sperm donors in the US get absolved from things like child support and whatnot if a single woman uses their sperm to father a child. But, barring some high-powered contracts of some nature I am too ignorant to comment on, if a guy's sperm impregnates a woman, he'll be on the hook. One truly egregious case involved a woman who "orally serviced" her boyfriend, and deposited his emission in a cup by the side of her bed. After he'd gone, she inseminated herself out of this cup, and got pregnant. Eventually she claimed child support of this guy, and won in court, and now he's on the hook.

So, back to your case. While this woman was married, assuming NZ law works similarly, her husband would have been on the hook for this child, and your husband would have had no rights, nor obligations, even without some layer of sperm donor contracts. If she conceives again with your husband's sperm, and she's single, then you really need to find out how NZ law treats potential rights and obligations.

A child has the right to claim support of its parents, and I cannot imagine how a contract signed by the mother and father abrogates that child's rights. If anyone knows more about this area of law, please speak up.

[_Jersey Girl]

Yes I do understand this way of looking at it .

I thought you might!

The initial function was simply to sort of 'pay it forward' after we had our kids - we got married in spite of my telling him I was not able to have kids (endometriosis), our initial plan was to adopt. As it turned out there had been some advances in micro-surgery and medicine since I had been told that.

I'm so glad that your plans for a family were realized!

He had been quite insistent on only donating to a husband/wife combination (I thought he should not rule out gay couples). I think his concern that any child he contributed to had a father resulted in the option being raised.

And things happen, Danna. People die and divorce. It is part of life.

We have no idea what the situation with the other couple is - whether the ex-husband remains involved or not.

Imagine yourself a married man who wanted to have children with his wife and couldn't manage it the traditional way.

Imagine yourself that married man who through the generosity of another man, was able to have a child. To be there for the birth, the bonding, diapers, late night feedings, teething, potty training, Christmases, birthdays, and Father's Day.

Imagine yourself that married man when the man who made it possible for you to have a relationship with a child, steps into the picture and then essentially takes away what he has given to you.

Imagine the heartache and the humiliation, Danna.

However, lots of families go through this sort of thing, and kids without one parent do fine in a loving, secure family.

That's very true, but you don't know if the child would be raised without the dad.

Try to look at it as a mathematical issue, Danna. Think about the child within the family that he knows, the parents he knows, grandparents, aunts and uncles that he knows. Then consider how his image and definition of "family" and his place in it, would begin to fragment (exponential growth seems the right term) when...

a sperm donor
a sperm donor's wife
half-siblings
other grandparents, aunts, uncles, etc.

are all introduced.

Who does the child "belong" to? Who co-parents him? What styles and methods of parenting are introduced?

We say in my field, that every time a new adult enters the classroom, the expectations change for the child and this produces confusion for the child until the new adult comes in line with classroom policies and approaches. Until all adults are "on the same page".

How much harder would it be for the boy when multiple new adults enter his LIFE, Danna? How many times must the child adjust to the expectations of the new adults and is it fair for a 4 year old little boy to be faced with that?

I say, no.

We were quite surprised at first, and I probably should have left some time to think about things before posting. It raised all sorts of polygamy parallels that set off a few of my triggers

I don't doubt that at all! And in response to your OP title, yes, you would be at risk of becoming the first wife.

[_Jersey Girl]

I want to add some more...

Danna, you stated that the original plan/contract included no information until the child is 18. At that point, I assume, it would be the child's choice. At age 18, we'd hope that the child was able to choose, certainly he would be legally able to choose.

What your husband was thinking about, Danna, would have taken control AWAY from the child. A 4 year old child, Danna, who doesn't understand, and can't understand what all of this is about.

Four years old is just figuring out and beginning to form a construct of what a "friend" is. (It's whoever is playing with you, by the way :-)

He can't understand what a sperm donor is, what the relationship of a sperm donor to him would be. He doesn't know who HE is, yet.

And while he is going about the business of forming these concepts, is it right to take control of something away from him that he cannot begin to understand?

Stick with the original plan, Danna. Give control to the boy and let it be when he is more able to choose what he wants. You guys already made your choice, let him make his as he feels moved to.

It's what is right to do for the child and what honors him.

[_Danna]

Thanks again for the very wise words Sethbag, Pokatater (I've always wondered, is that short for 'pocket potato'), TD and Jersey Girl. We have decided to keep the no contact thing in place, and check the legal ramifications of donating to a single parent. Over here, in adoption to civil union couples only one parent is the legal parent - and I think it is the same situation with donation. But we will check to make sure first. Our family have had surprises before - one that had me completely stunned was when my brother and co-habiting girlfriend split up while she was pregnant. She didn't want it and he didn't want it adopted out of the family.

Our then 55yo mother (desperately) wanted to raise the baby herself, and the three married sisters would have welcomed the child as well. The ex-girlfriend's parents convinced her that raising the child Mormon was just untenable. So in spite of my brother claiming fathership and my mother getting a lawyer, the ex-girlfriend denied that he was the father and the child was adopted out on her say-so. It took my mother six months of legal wrangling to get a DNA test confirming fatherhood. My sisters and I spent a fair bit of time convincing her that it was now really wrong to take the baby - the wee girl had a new family and it would be extreme cruelty to break it up even if she had a legal right. That really stretched her - she was convinced denying the little girl a Mormon upbringing was a form of abandonment. My brother has visitation rights now, and is sort of an uncle-figure to the girl and her (also-adopted) brother, and things are working out fine. Mum probably spends more time knitting and sewing for that grandchild than all the others combined!

Anyway, the present conundrum; We all have no idea who the other party is except the agency, who must maintain the details. If I recall correctly adoptive children have the right to have information on their biological parents, and it is expected that donor children will get the same when the law catches up with technology, so all donors with this clinic must be prepared to release contact details to adult children in anticipation of the law change - apparently this factor drastically dropped the donor rate when it was introduced but it is a responsible thing to do. NZ may be a wee bit different in attitudes to ancestors, and the right to know your biological heritage, which is probably due to our cultural makeup.

Our boys are too young to know about the donating - and after mulling over comments (thanks again Jersey Girl) I am thinking we will not let them know until they are adults. The way kids think, Luke might think his dad could also 'abandon' him or something. I have no idea how the other family will deal with the issue. My own view is that DNA is a pattern, like a knitting pattern. The same pattern can produce drastically different sweaters, depending on the wool, needles, and knitting style of the knitter. For humans it is the active parents that provide the bulk of the resources.

[_Jersey Girl]

Our boys are too young to know about the donating - and after mulling over comments (thanks again Jersey Girl) I am thinking we will not let them know until they are adults.

If you feel you must tell your older child, Danna, you could do it when he turns 18 or there abouts, long before the boy will have access to the personal information. No need, to thank me, Danna. There are four things I know really well in life. Three, four and five year olds, and what it is like to wake up one day, step out the door and go into total free fall. :-)

The way kids think, Luke might think his dad could also 'abandon' him or something.

There are all sorts of ways that Luke could receive this if he were made aware of it now.

I have no idea how the other family will deal with the issue. My own view is that DNA is a pattern, like a knitting pattern. The same pattern can produce drastically different sweaters, depending on the wool, needles, and knitting style of the knitter. For humans it is the active parents that provide the bulk of the resources.

I love the way you express yourself, Danna. :-) I think you've sorted through all of this so well!

[_Mercury]

Queue Pythons "Every Sperm is Sacred"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0kJHQpvgB8