Readers interested in how accomodating lesbian parents will impact the definition of parenthood should take a careful look at this post, by Julie Shapiro and the discussion in the comments. She is referring to the Santa Cruz case, in which a woman who conceived twins with a known sperm donor, left the lesbian relationship and is now living with the sperm donor. They, the biological mother and father, want to raise the children themselves. I talked about this case when it was first reported.
This scenario is one that many lesbian couples doubtless consider when deciding how to obtain sperm. And it strongly suggests that choosing an unknown donor (perhaps with eventual donor identification) is safer.
I wonder about how much the law alone can do to facilitate the use of a known/present sperm provider. A clear statement that the provider is not a parent may not be enough. If it is useful to have a known/present sperm provider, it needs to be a safe choice for both of the women. This case is worth watching to see if the choice is indeed safe.
safe for the women? what about the child? But who is taking account of the impact on the child conceived in these circumstances?
Through the comments, it becomes clear that fathers really are being written off, if not pushed out, for insufficient involvement. A reader/commenter writes in to ask Julie to clarify:
But back to my other point, which is the bias against men, that men’s fatherhood is to be determined by whether or not is is convenient for women. I find this outlook incredibly disturbing, but since I haven’t managed to shake it, maybe it will help if I point out how this outlook really is damaging to women. Julie has mentioned a number of times that biological mothering can not be equated with biological fathering. In fact, though a biological mother is a mother, there is no such thing as a biological father according to Julie’s philosophy….
Isn’t one of the biggest complaint by women, both those who identify as feminists and those who don’t, the “second shift,” the double responsibilities of work and home, and the widespread failure of men to pick up slack in household and childcare duties?But why indeed not? If fatherhood is just a choice, how can a father be blamed for choosing the extent of how much he will or will not participate in parenting activities?
Here is how Julie Shapiro reponds to this question:
I think we should encourage men to become parents. But I think that means more than rewarding them with status for nothing more then delivering sperm. To grant a man legal status as a parent by virtue of his genetic contribution alone where he has not demonstrated some commitment to actually raising/caring for the child can effectively give the man power over the child and the child’s mother. This troubles me. I think perhaps you are asserting that if we give men the status of parents they will rise to the challenge and become more engaged? Maybe I just don’t have enough of that hope left. I think we should be clear about what kind of commitment is required if one is to become a legal parent and then encourage men to undertake it. But I don’t think we should give them the authority up front.
This is what’s coming, as we disconnect sex from procreation and marriage: we are about disconnect biology from parenthood.
H/T to Karen, one of the commenters, here and on Julie Shapiro’s blog.