|
This graphic recently sparked a lively conversation on our private DSR Facebook group page. It depicts all of a DCP's parents: biological (there are always two, the egg and the sperm contributors) and non-biological (sometimes one, sometimes more), depending on the family make-up and diversity. It includes every family type and all genders. No certain type of parent is more or less important than any other type; the colors, sizes, and shapes came from a template and do not hold any significance. Shortly after posting the graphic and listening to some of the feedback, I added the word "parent" to supplement both biological and non-biological "mothers" and "fathers".
Some seemed to be viewing the graphic as an attempt to invalidate their significance or role as a parent, or an attempt to exclude LGBTQ+ parents. We feel that acknowledging all of a child's genetic and non-genetic parents is crucial for building a healthy relationship with your donor-conceived child.. LGBTQ+ families have always been a valued segment of our community, making up more than a third of DSR families. Some LGBTQ+ participants (and others speaking on their behalf) expressed concern because they felt the graphic was exclusive, wanting me to delete the words "mother" and "father" to be more inclusive.😕 It was awfully confusing at times.
"Parent" is both a noun and a verb. Donors, whether they are a biological/genetic mother, father, or parent, usually only parent the children they are raising. This person, however, does pass along a genetic heritage, including ancestry, family medical history, and various physical and mental attributes. Additionally, their parents are the biological grandparents, and their children are half-siblings to the donor-conceived people.
We all define family differently, and there is no definitive right or wrong way to do so. That said, we have 25 years of research data and anecdotal information on all donor family members to help inform us how best to have a healthy and happy family. When parents resist acknowledging their child's close genetic relatives, eg, "those people are not your family", "DNA doesn't make a family" (it isn't the only way, but it is one way), or having no discussion whatsoever, there can be negative repercussions.
I often consult with donor-conceived adults who feel guilty for being curious, seeking out, and connecting with their genetic donor family behind their parents' backs because they don't have parental support. Many are upset because their parents didn't allow them to grow up knowing their half-siblings, and they are sad for the lost time and opportunities. Acknowledging all of a donor-conceived person's relatives is important; we learned this from the adoption community a long time ago. We know better, and we parents can do better. (See my most recent Psychology Today article.)
Some of the 275 comments:
My son is genetically related to my wife, I gave birth to him, and his sperm donor is NOT a parent. I would never use the term parent to describe him because of what being a parent implies.
Are the red and green meant to signify something, specifically the "always" and "sometimes" hexagons? It reads as some sort of a value judgment, though I can't quite figure out what/which.
This is garbage. What about all other types of parents raising donor-conceived children? Delete this shit.
Birthing mother is the Bio parent, ovum donor is just that - a donor.
The red/green color scheme is closely associated with stop/go (especially in hexagons) so will make people think you’re saying non-genetic parents should be stopped. If you switched to circles and a more neutral color scheme (for example, blue and orange), and just removed gendered language in favor of “parents”, you’d make things clearer.
This only applies to heterosexual families.
I don't understand what this is trying to portray. As literally everyone pointed out - it is not inclusive of many families who don't have a "mother" and "father" nor is inclusive of those born by surrogate. If this expressing how genetics work - then this is also inaccurate. It is hard to determine what this is expressing.
The group still not included might be non-binary or trans parents who use different terms for themselves as parents.
Let's call the biologicals what they are DONORS, not parents and will never be parents to my children!!! They literally gave 2 cells that does not make them parents.
You mean genetic parents. A biological parent is who birthed them.
By definition, when discussing families, biological means “genetically related; related by blood”.
Your “biological parent is the one who birthed them” argument is wrong- especially when you consider gestational surrogacy. I was a gestational surrogate in 2023 and am in NO way related to that child. I am not her “biological mother”. I am simply the surrogate who carried her.
Let’s be clear: a donor is not a parent. The term parent carries far more weight than biology—it means showing up, loving unconditionally, raising, guiding, and sacrificing for a child. A donor contributes DNA. That’s it. They are the biological mother or father, not the child’s parent.
This came across as trans-exclusionary to me. It seems to emphasize some greater importance of the people biologically related to DCP over the people who may have a variety of other roles in their lives.
People are reading way too much into this.
What is the meaning of the hexagons? And the language. What does the red and the green signify? This seems to imply biological connection determines more who that child will be which is not true, aside from possible mental health disorders or physical traits. It just doesn’t feel positive. I have a donor egg baby who has an amazing egg donor who he will know someday but he’s 100% going to grow up considering ME his biological mother.
This graphic continues to be problematic and harmful. You need to remove the words mother and father. Someone can have a body that makes eggs and not identify as a woman/mother, and someone can have a body that makes sperm and not identify as a man/father. The terms mother and father are gendered terms that should not be used here because they assume gender identity, and that is not something you can assume just based on whether someone’s body makes eggs or sperm, etc.
People operate in gangs sometimes, and this seems to be one of those instances. Also, people in my LGBTQ community can be exhausting/hypercritical/bewildering. Our lives as LGBTQ people aren't always easy, but sometimes we need to be more graceful and open-minded, instead of becoming close-minded like their protagonists. This discussion is a huge, nonsensical distraction. Everyone is trying to make this about themselves rather than the children.
I'm a lesbian and a mother, and I don't want to see myself in this. Genetics are not what makes a parent, and this diagram is nonsense.
Reading the responses makes me angry, but also sad for all the kids of these posters.
As a DCP, this chart resonates with everything I know my RP and social father could never bring themselves to understand about me. Thank you for making it!!! Despite those who don't want to understand.
My daughter is my egg and donor sperm. I am her biological mother, but my husband is not her “biological” father. He’s just her legal father.
I saw your post .. as a queer and non binary RP.. I totally agree with your post. It's unfortunate so many in the queer community (most my friends included!) feel that to accept the term biological parent erases their own parent identity.
I am donor-conceived. I have a non-genetic dad who raised me and a genetic parent who contributed half my DNA as a donor. Each of them is important to me. My genetic father and his family are important to me, regardless of the fact that he did not raise me. My paternal grandparents are still my grandparents, and my paternal cousins are my cousins. It doesn’t take anything away from the mum and dad who raised me, but it adds huge value to my life.
I am a queer woman married to a woman and we have sons made possible by a donor. I have many friends and family who are transgender; we belong to a large and diverse community. When did we all start attacking each other? I am so sad reading the responses to this post. My understanding is that Wendy is trying to create a simple way to explain “A Donor Conceived Person’s Parents.” Yes, it can get complicated; from what I’ve read, she’s made many adjustments. My experience with Wendy over the years has always been to be inclusive and in no way trying to offend. I am also thankful she has facilitated our son’s connection with their donor siblings. Perhaps we should all put ourselves in Wendy’s shoes and read through the comments to this post. I am a “mother” to our sons, and I personally feel it’s important that this word and “father” remain in the language, along with other identifications such as “parent” when a person identifies with neither. As Wendy has done. It took us a lot to become a family with two mothers more than 20 years ago; we dealt with discrimination, and I do not want to lose being identified as a mother.
And finally, a former sperm donor's perspective from Shawn Miller-Krausz:
This is an interesting graphic and conversation. I can see why people disagree, and this brings out strong emotions. One perspective that isn't in this conversation is mine. I was a sperm donor in the early 00s (and also happen to be part of the LGBTQ community). I have 3 biological kids that I know of. Some people seem to think that a donor can't care about their offspring, even though they've never met - that's false. There are times when donors are reduced to their scientific DNA code and family medical history, and there is a level of ignorance there. I am awed by the amount of love, care, pain, and investment that parenting takes - I see it with my family and friends on a daily basis. But it's not 100% of the story when donors are involved. There are so many stories of adopted people who meet their biological families and have an important connection that they missed with adoptive families, and that can be true (although not always true) in this community as well. I know a lot of people disagree with that, and that's okay. But my two cents (for what it's worth - maybe not much!) is, there are several misperceptions coming from many who have been critical of Wendy's post.
Donors are people too. We have personalities and traits (not just disorders and diseases) that get passed to our offspring, whether anyone likes it or knows it. A lot of it's a mystery that we'll never totally understand because of the lines people draw. But if you become more open-minded, you can learn a lot about the dual influence of social and biological parents.
Wendy is simply stating facts… her facts have validity. Feelings are facts, however feelings can be validated if they are based in factual reality. When people come onto a page/group that she has provided to assist people that this group applies to, and she is treated like she has been over this factual post, then yes … it is bullying! People can agree to disagree all they want, and they can choose to deny the reality and science to make themselves feel better about choices they have made or whatever. It is in no way ok to treat a person who has simply shared factual material to be forced to feel that she has to MANIPULATE those facts to make some feel better about themselves. The real problem is the habitual inwardly focused nature of people.
| 
