Too bad for the kids
The Post magazine has put up its cover story for tomorrow, about a New England single mother, Raechel McGhee, and her two donor-conceived children flying out to California to meet the children’s donor, Mike Rubino.
…..McGhee went at her search backwards: having a child via anonymous male specimen, then once she found out who he was, “deep down” hoping that “something miraculous” might happen and she and her children’s sperm donor might “become a couple.”
McGhee is a psychotherapist, so we might have expected she would understand the unreality of her own hopes with regard to Man #929, who spent a year, um, “producing specimens” in the sperm bank twice a week
…….Ultimately, whether or not this is its intention, I think the article does a good job of serving to question the whole notion of not only donor anonymity but also the third-party-donor business itself.
Moral ambiguity has a way of coming back to haunt us…. and topics long thought laid to rest will reappear in ways that give proof to “truth is stranger than fiction”.