TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Two years after US soldier's death, widow has his son
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Two years after US soldier's death, widow has his son

post #1 of 15
Thread Starter 
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20071019...omenscienceivf

Has anyone seen this? What are your feelings about it? I don't really know where I stand. I feel for the woman losing her husband but the child has no father. I would imagine it is going to be vary hard for the child as he grows up.
post #2 of 15
I dont know if I could do it, My hubby is in the Airforce, and I really think that a baby would not be a replacement for him, i know when you love some one you want them to live on, but I think this is to far, especially as he never said that he wanted to have a baby if he was killed, I think they used the baby as a replacement
post #3 of 15
Good for her. It is her body, her husband had already banked the semen. Go for it.

What was she going to do? Wait for another man. She was forty. By the time you meet someone, get to know each other, wait for the health reports it would take time. Or use anonymous sperm? At least this way she can tell her son what kind of man his father was.

As someone who is trying to get pregnant at 40 I know it can be hard. So I would actively support her if she asked. Otherwise it is just her personal business whether to have the child or not.

Tricia
post #4 of 15
This husband and wife obviously loved each other enough to plan a family together. The wife is already deprived of her husband because of a stupid war. I don't think she should be deprived of the baby that they planned as well.
post #5 of 15
The concept has a romantic undertone to it. Her husband is dead, but he can still live on through his child. If she is 40 and looking to have a child or raise one, that was perfect for her. Even if she met someone who knows if she would've been still able to bear children (invetro or artificial insemination or other). She's still at an age where a child will not bear her down.

I personally think its wonderful.
post #6 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by lunasmom View Post
The concept has a romantic undertone to it. Her husband is dead, but he can still live on through his child. If she is 40 and looking to have a child or raise one, that was perfect for her. Even if she met someone who knows if she would've been still able to bear children (invetro or artificial insemination or other). She's still at an age where a child will not bear her down.

I personally think its wonderful.
I agree..I am glad for her. It would be horrible not to be able to do that if you wanted to.
post #7 of 15
Apparently she and her hubby talked about this if he had the semen stored. If that's what she wants whose business is it anyway? She's not asking anyone to go through labour or raise the child for her. I can certainly see someone loving their mate enough to want to have their child even, and maybe especially, after his much too early death.
post #8 of 15
i think its the sweetest thing. They already talked about the reality if he was lost, and now the woman can share they love she had with the husband with her child, and she knows all about the father, so it makes it romantic and sweet. I think its AWESOME that tech is so up to date that things like this can be a reality for people.
post #9 of 15
Plenty of kids conceived the old fashioned way are growing up without their fathers because of this war. The method is not my concern. My concern is the benefits. Is this child going to be eligible for all of the benefits available to children conceived prior to their military parents' deaths?

Taxes pay for those things. Creating children after the fact presents some interesting questions. Technically, you can produce a lot of children from stored semen. If some widow decides to have three dozen kids (via surrogates or whatever), are we, as taxpayers, obligated to provide all of them with the benefits associated with being the child of a fallen servicemember?
post #10 of 15
I am very happy for her.
post #11 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by JenC511 View Post
Plenty of kids conceived the old fashioned way are growing up without their fathers because of this war. The method is not my concern. My concern is the benefits. Is this child going to be eligible for all of the benefits available to children conceived prior to their military parents' deaths?

Taxes pay for those things. Creating children after the fact presents some interesting questions. Technically, you can produce a lot of children from stored semen. If some widow decides to have three dozen kids (via surrogates or whatever), are we, as taxpayers, obligated to provide all of them with the benefits associated with being the child of a fallen servicemember?
The US government is not going to go broke even if it has to pay benefits to this child.
The article says there are only four such cases known.
post #12 of 15
jenniferfd,

For now. It's still an issue that needs to be addressed. Lest you think I'm not interested in the plight of dead servicemembers, I have had to attend their funerals, attend memorial ceremonies for their commands, and console their widows. I have to see their widows and children at every family event. This is an issue that is close to home for me. Do I think kids should be born today to these dead men? Nope. Do I care if a widow wants to do it on her time and her dime for sentimental reasons? Nope. I just don't feel the need to support it with my tax dollars.

It's not an issue of the U.S. government going broke. It's not going to go broke over a lot of things. That doesn't mean everything we can afford is justified. We only afford it because someone, somewhere was working hard for that dollar. Most of the military folks (well, actually, ALL of them) I asked are honestly creeped out by the whole idea, but even after I explain that he froze his semen specifically for a situation like this, they still don't believe the resulting children should be eligible for the same benefits as children conceived prior to his death. The benefits are supposed to attempt to compensate for the loss. The loss hasn't been felt by the babies born long after the man is dead. The babies are born to single mothers. It's not wrong to have them, but it's not at all like some unfortunate tragedy has been visited upon them.
post #13 of 15
I have no problem with this. The husband banked his sperm for a reason ,in case he came back infertile, so that one day he and his wife could have a baby. When he died in the war the wife decided to carry on with what they had obviously planned to do in the future. So in my mind even tho he did not say that day she could use it there is implied consent there.

On the note of the child growing up without a father, well thats nothing new in this country. Does anyone have issues with women continuing their pregnancy when they became pregnant before deployment and then become widows? I mean that child will not know his or her father. Or what about the women who get pregnant and the father disappears, or they use a sperm bank, or when they adopt when they are single. Are these problems as well. Should all these women wait until marriage before having kids?
post #14 of 15
I'm glad for her. I would definitely want that option! I love my boyfriend SO much that I don't know what I would do without him. In my mind the only way I think I would be able to keep going every day is if I still had a part of him. She may have lost her husband, but how wonderful it is that she can still have a part of him. She can keep going knowing that they have a child.
post #15 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by peachytoday View Post
Good for her. It is her body, her husband had already banked the semen. Go for it.

What was she going to do? Wait for another man. She was forty. By the time you meet someone, get to know each other, wait for the health reports it would take time. Or use anonymous sperm? At least this way she can tell her son what kind of man his father was.

As someone who is trying to get pregnant at 40 I know it can be hard. So I would actively support her if she asked. Otherwise it is just her personal business whether to have the child or not.

Tricia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ping View Post
I have no problem with this. The husband banked his sperm for a reason ,in case he came back infertile, so that one day he and his wife could have a baby. When he died in the war the wife decided to carry on with what they had obviously planned to do in the future. So in my mind even tho he did not say that day she could use it there is implied consent there.

On the note of the child growing up without a father, well thats nothing new in this country. Does anyone have issues with women continuing their pregnancy when they became pregnant before deployment and then become widows? I mean that child will not know his or her father. Or what about the women who get pregnant and the father disappears, or they use a sperm bank, or when they adopt when they are single. Are these problems as well. Should all these women wait until marriage before having kids?
Thankyou ladies!! You two have made some wonderful points!

I can totally understand why this woman chose to do that and i support it! Colin and I have already had a similar discussion. He was in the navy for 8 yrs and right now is an inactive reserve- if something happens and he is to be called up- we want to bank his sperm. The reason for us is that I have PCOS- i do NOT have years and years to have a child- i only have a few years left to even attempt it to be honest. My doctors have told me that i will need a complete hysto. in a few years (i'm 22 now and we're talking about by the time i'm 28 or so depending on how much my PCOS worsens). I want to be a mother- i want it with every beat of my heart- i would never want to loose that opportunity- he agrees and has said the same thing about wanting to be a father. But we have also discussed what he would want if her were to pass on and still have his sperm banked- and he has already said he hoped i'd go on to try in vitro and have a baby because it's something that means the world to both of us. So yes- i understand why this woman wanted to do this and i support her! I would never want to miss out on having a child because we had to wait or because when he was deployed- he got exposed to something that would make it too dangerous for us to try and concieve- so i see a reason for it and i support it 100%. Many people think women can wait to have kids because technology has made it possible for some to concieve later in life- BUT not EVERY woman has that kind of luck- many who wait too long find out they're unable to concieve at all- i don't want to wait forever, even if it would mean i'd have to be a single mother. My child would be raised in a loving home and would be surrounded by wonderful friends and family -so i know i would have everyone's support- sure it'd be hard- but it would be worth it for me!
]
If for some reason my fiance should ever be deployed again (And i pray to God it never happens)- we will certainly do the same thing as this woman chose to do. It is the right decision for us.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Two years after US soldier's death, widow has his son