Mom Harvests Dead Sons Baby

MOST HELPFUL POSTS

Jennifer - posted on 07/08/2011

270

5

54

The son passed in '09. I hardly think two years later is doing it right away. The article also makes no mention of other children, so this seems to me like it might be the only way she was ever going to become a grandmother. And it is fulfilling his sons dream of becoming a dad in a way. He might be gone, but that doesn't make it so that he wouldn't be the childs father. If you disagree, why don't you try asking people who have lost a child or a given birth to a stillborn or had a miscarriage if the child(ren) that they lost are any less their child(ren) because they're gone. OR you could ask people whose dads have passed if they're no longer their dad anymore. And the ex husbands opinion might change after the grandchild is born.

Melissa - posted on 07/06/2011

441

41

31

And for those who have concern over the child having no "parents", there are many children raised by their grandparents who are not in any way negatively effected. I have a friend who was raised by his grandparents because his mother died during delivery. He's never known his father. He aknowledges that it sucks, but he knows he's been given a good life, and he knows his grandparents have done only the best by him. Also take into consideration adopted children. They potentially will never know their birth parents, either, but I also know several people who grew up in adopted homes and have also had wonderful upbringing and wonderful lives. Families come in all different shapes and sizes. Some aren't seen as "normal" to many, but that doesn't mean they don't work, and it doesn't mean the child will be hindered in any way. If presented properly, I think the child may even appreciate how he was brought into this world. It's all in how you look at it. I don't think this woman had any malicious or sick intentions, I think she's a greiving woman who knew her son wanted a child, someone to carry on his name and genetic code (a natural need for many of us) and she wanted to make sure that happened. Obviously a judge, someone meant to judge situations and make the best judgement, felt it was an acceptable request, otherwise I don't think they'd have allowed it.

Melissa - posted on 07/06/2011

441

41

31

If he's an only child he may be the only one to carry on the bloodline. To many that's a very important thing. My hubby was an only child, he lost his father when he was 17 (I've known him since he was 16) and I know ever since then he's dreamed of being a father and carrying on his beloved fathers bloodline. I know if he were to pass for any reason, his mother would have done the same (if I weren't around to have done it that natural way already lol). I do think it's a unique concept, and maybe not "normal" in the eyes of society, but I think it's beautiful. I also think it might help bring a lot of closure to a woman who had to bury her son; something a parent should never have to do, but sadly many have. In having her sons child (not having as in birthing, but having as in raising and loving) she will have a peice of her son, and know that his life will live on in his own off spring. That's my little twist on the situation lol, idk if anyone else would agree. I think it's beautiful, though.

Tara - posted on 07/06/2011

2,567

14

114

I have no problem with this at all.
Her son is no longer here to object or consent. He had no other next of kin, no wife or girlfriend etc. to speak of.
If his mother wants to try for a grandchild with his sperm, why not?
Who is she hurting by doing so?

74 Comments

View replies by

Sal - posted on 07/10/2011

1,816

16

34

having a biologiacl gandchild that is born from sperm harvested from your dead son and a surrogant and brought up by you as the sole care giver isn;'t like being a grandparent either!!!!!! and i didn;t mean a legal adoption but to find a mum and child who need that grandparent role the same way that she needed a grand child....if her son had adopted later in life i'm sure she'd be a wnderful grandmother to his adopted child...why because it was his child and him raising it was what made the connection....and she can't get that from this situation

[deleted account]

Jennifer, before you attack me I would appreciate it if you read my whole post. I said "I know their are many circumstances where children are born to single parents, or widowed parents, THAT'S DIFFERENT". Do you see the single parent in there? I was a single parent fwith my first child until I meet my now husband. That is all together a different story. I don't think this woman should be making these kinds of choices when she is so full of grief.

Jennifer - posted on 07/10/2011

270

5

54

ADOPT your grandchildren? How do you adopt NONbiological GRANDchildren? Adopting is not the same as her having a biological grandchild. I doubt she's going to have the children call her mommy, so....she is being a grandmother. She's not trying to relive being a mother. I've heard of tons of children raised by either one grandparent or both....in this case it's just one.
I doubt whether a child is being brought into the world purposefully without parents around (or alive) or loses them makes much difference, no matter how it comes about. After all, why would the way it came about make it any better? At least these children will have someone who loves them and will take care of them, which is more than I can say for a lot of children out there who do have parents who are alive.
Why would she adopt a single mom with no support? More than likely, to adopt a single mom that mom would be underage and that really WOULD be like trying to fill the void from her son if she only has one child. That doesn't make sense to me. Being a stand in grandmother just isn't the same as having your blood running through their veins, though it might be for some people. It's not simply just adding them to a family tree or "keeping the bloodline going," it's the fact that these children are part of her, part of her son. Not replacing him, they'll just hold a part of him in them.
And in an ideal situation, yes, I'm sure it would have been nice to see her son with her grandchild and not have to actually raise the child herself (and she probably would have). But seeing as that is literally impossible, she is willing to take care of them in his stead, which I don't see a problem with. That is very common. The way they are going to come about isn't too common, but, it is not too uncommon for grandparents or a grandparent to take care of their grandchildren when the parent(s) are not able to.
This is the last I have to say about the matter.

Sal - posted on 07/09/2011

1,816

16

34

there is a big difference a pregnacy ending with the baby being adopted out or a child who becomes an orphan and bringing a child into the world purposly with out parents...
and if she just wanted to be a grandmother why not "adopt" a single mum with no support and being a grand mum to her child as you said plenty of people are loved and cherished by people with out a biologial link, and she isn;t being a grandmother as far as i can see,unless the surrogant is going to raise the child and she gets to play nanna, the way she is doing it she is going to be the mother, a grandmother (unless there is a parenting issue or a death) helps mum and dad and has the fun jobs, not the whole deal, part of that joy is being able to see your child with their child, not just having the baby to put on the family tree reguardless of how it was concieved

Jennifer - posted on 07/09/2011

270

5

54

If it is her only child, then maybe she just wants her grandchild(ren)--just like she told the judge. And to carry on her sons legacy. I don't necessarily think she's trying to replace him. I'm sure she knows nothing can.

As for the whole "parentless" thing, there are many children whose parents give them up for adoption and are raised by people who aren't even related to them. Does this make them parentless, too? Or grandmothers or grandparents who raise their grandchild(ren) after their childs passing OR when circumstances come up where the parents cannot raise their children properly on their own. Is this, too, parentless? Let's not forget about the orphans, whom I'm sure aren't as well off as these children will be in the care of his mother.

[deleted account]

Liz, NOK can already make a slew of decisions after our death (or mental incapacitation) that we may or may not agree with. They can veto organ donation, or bury instead of cremate. Hell, they can even choose to turn off life support! NOK's act without the express consent of the deceased all the time. That's what makes them NOK.



Yeah, I guess I find all of it objectionable. There seems to be an imbalance, if you compare it to property rights.



If I were a wealthy man, for example, I could set up a trust that dictates how my money will be used for generations. Say, I only want it to be used for college tuition. My children, their children, and so on... It would be really hard for them to get around that trust and use the money for something else.



But these same people could conceivably harvest my sperm and create children using my genetic material (one can hardly say they were "my" children)?



It just seems to me that we should have as many rights to our body and our genetic material as we do to our property -- if not more!



It's not just because it's the boy's mother. I feel this way about anyone doing this, without explicit consent.

Sal - posted on 07/08/2011

1,816

16

34

the only way i'd be ethically happy for this to have gone down was if the son was an active donator to a sperm bank and the mother accessed that sperm, or as in the case in australia that i mentioed earlier where the husband and wife were in the process of ivf when the husband was killed that way i;d know that he was 100% ok with a child with is genes running around out there with out him having any attatchment to it, and that he was 100% ok with his sperm being used after his death, i still doubt the choses made by the women in these situations but i am ok with the males sperm being used..

Sal - posted on 07/08/2011

1,816

16

34

i wanted children with my husband because he would be a great father, not becuase he had a great gene profile and would make a good looking kid....my heart truly aches for people in this situation, and i prey that it isn;t a situation i won;t be faced with but i still don't think it is ethical, and i certainly wouldn't do it myself,

Sherri - posted on 07/08/2011

9,593

15

391

Actually this is a fairly common practice. A wife did this not to long ago around here with her dead husband. She ended up getting pregnant with triplets. Both sides families were absolutely delighted. They are since doing well and she feels that she carried her husbands legacy on.

Katherine - posted on 07/08/2011

65,420

232

5195

I think what Gena is trying to say is that the child will be parent less. If it was meant to be it would have happened the way God intended. I don't agree with THAT statement. Her son is dead. She took his sperm. Without his permission. She only knew that someday he wanted kids.

That didn't give her the right to make that decision. As I said before, and as others have said, she is replacing him with a new baby to deal with her grief.

I think she needs counseling, just my opinion, not a baby to fill the void.

Jennifer - posted on 07/08/2011

270

5

54

GENA, what you said is hilarious to me. Why would someone intentionally bring a child into the world without a father? I did, twice, (I'm a single mother of two) because unfortunately there are some boys out there in the world and to single mothers around the world these boys are referred to as "sperm donors" because that's all they ended up doing, and not because we wanted them to. One hasn't seen the oldest one a day in her life (she's not going to be six soon) and the other one hardly ever saw her even when we were together and hasn't bothered to even ask about her since I broke up with him in February. So, it's selfish for me to have had them both still? It may have been difficult for you, but, did you bother to stop and imagine how difficult it was for your parent to raise you on their own? Would it have been easier for you if they had just not had you??? To me it is not so different. You cannot always choose what you wanted to happen in your life. Yes, he is not able to be there for those future children. At least he really can't, rather than be one of those far too many who can and just aren't.

Jennifer - posted on 07/08/2011

270

5

54

Yeah. I don't know if I would do the same thing, either, but I cannot really say because I am not in that position. But, it doesn't really bother me, nor does it shock me. I don't see why it horrifies some people. I see bad news on the television or in the paper all the time, people killing children and everything. Hell, I'd pick hearing about a grandmother wanting to welcome a grandchild into the world over a person that chose to take a child out of the world any day.

Ez - posted on 07/08/2011

6,569

25

237

Jennifer, I agree with you. I don't think anyone can really know how they would feel unless in that situation. I'm not saying I would make the same choice as this woman. I really have no idea. But I don't cringe at the idea either.

Sal - posted on 07/08/2011

1,816

16

34

and didn;t the sons father opose the whole thing, doesn;t his rights as NOK have any weight?

Sal - posted on 07/08/2011

1,816

16

34

to a degree i would find it a little unethical to harvest sperm even for a wife or girlfiend, the guy is dead, remember him but to love the memory you don;t have to recreate him,

if my husband had died without us having kids it would never of passed my mind to harvest sperm (and here i doubt the law would allow it) i would of wanted a family "with" him not by him,and i being the living one has the chance to rebuild my life and have children with another man who can love them and be part of their lives not a ghost haunting them frm the past,

in the story he wanted to be a dad, and i can only assume that was part of the loving family with the childs mother and not just be a sperm doner to a baby to hand over to his mum to look after, and she wanted to be a grandmother not a mother which is what she basically is going to be, it does strike me as creepy that she basically is going to be the mother to her sons child...i know with children already born this does happen, but how many people have a baby just for their mum to look after,

Ez - posted on 07/08/2011

6,569

25

237

Liz, NOK can already make a slew of decisions after our death (or mental incapacitation) that we may or may not agree with. They can veto organ donation, or bury instead of cremate. Hell, they can even choose to turn off life support! NOK's act without the express consent of the deceased all the time. That's what makes them NOK.

So in this case, where there is no significant other, that role falls to the mother. If he had a wife or girlfriend, and she was the one wanting to harvest his sperm, would you still find it unethical? If he was in a same-sex relationship, and his partner wished to take his sperm to a surrogate, would that still be wrong? Or is it just the fact that it's the mother?

These are not rhetorical questions by the way lol. I'm trying to understand, because I see it so differently.

Amber - posted on 07/08/2011

13

19

0

If he said that he wanted it to be done, then its his final wish... however, its creepy in my opinion.

Sherri - posted on 07/08/2011

9,593

15

391

I think it is absolutely fine. If it helps the living still here, I think why not. They are dead they are honestly not going to care.

[deleted account]

I don't think it's unethical. She is his next of kin.



Does that she mean she "inherits" his body, including use of his sperm, after he's dead?



Would you want someone harvesting your eggs to create children after you're dead? I would say "over my dead body" except... well, you know.



I think people need to give explicit consent for this. The idea that my next of kin can do anything they want with my body is creepy, yeah.

Melissa - posted on 07/08/2011

441

41

31

Erin, I agree! In fact (I'm unable to find the link to the article, it was a few years ago or so) there was a woman engaged to a soldier. He was called overseas before they could be married, causing them to push their wedding date back. He was killed overseas, so she AND his family fought the court systems, and she was able to "marry" him even after death, and if I'm remembering correctly I do believe they did harvest his sperm as well so she could bear his children.

People in mourning don't always handle things the same way, but I don't think this woman has done anyone any harm. She clearly loved her son, and I believe she will love her grandchild just as much, maybe even more so. I mentioned in a previous comment that I have a friend who was raised by his grandparents because his mother passed during delivery, and he never knew his father. I had a chance to talk to him yesterday and we discussed this article. I asked if he ever felt he was "replacing" his mother in his grandparents eyes, and whether or not he "helped" his grandparents mourn their daughter. I realize everyone is different and everyone handles things differently, but just for a "like-minded" insight, I found it interesting to get his and their opinions. He never once felt pressure to take her place, or fill her shoes. He's his own person and was always allowed to be what came naturally to him. As for his grandparents, his birth DID help them mourn their daughter; they had someone who needed their constant love, affection, happiness and care. They saw their daughter in their grandson, and they woke up every day doing the best they could for him. I don't think it's fair for anyone to say that she's "replacing" her son or that her grandchild will ultimately be damaged by his being brought into this world, more or less. I've said it before and I'll say it again; I think it's beautiful.

Jennifer - posted on 07/08/2011

270

5

54

I'm sure when the son said that he wanted to have kids someday he didn't mean having his sperm harvested after his passing, BUT, if you go along with that thought, then you also have to accept the fact that I'm sure he didn't intend to die before having children at the age of 21, either.
Honestly, it's something different that not everyone does or would do, but we all have differences and she made a choice to do that. And no one could really say what they would do in her position because you're not. Would you want to be judged worldwide for every decision you ever made that wasn't popular?

Ez - posted on 07/07/2011

6,569

25

237

I don't think it's weird or creepy at all. I don't know that it's the wisest choice (for her own grieving process etc) to be pursuing a surrogate so soon after the son's death, but otherwise I'm fine with it.

I don't think it's unethical. She is his next of kin. Would it be more acceptable if it were his wife harvesting the sperm?

Christina - posted on 07/07/2011

1,513

28

142

Only thing that concerns me is this child. Who is going to raise it? Her? Then technically it's her child, not her grandchild, regardless of the sperm.
Only way it wouldn't be creepy to me is if the sperm was used for close family friend who couldn't have kids and needed a donor. That way she could play grandma and nothing more.

Gina - posted on 07/07/2011

388

6

12

I think this is sad,she's trying to hold on to her dead son. I can understand,my cousin lost two young boys and she will never fully be over their deaths, but I feel this is wrong.

Yes he wanted kids and he lost that chance because even if his mother has a child using his sperm it doesn't give him the kids she says he wanted because he's gone and she has to learn to live with that.

Kimberly - posted on 07/07/2011

376

10

16

oh yeah i heard that its happened once before too. its honestly not uncommon

Carmina - posted on 07/07/2011

205

0

21

if its what the son wanted then that is beautiful, i can understand to an extent.. i cant be bothered reading the article but if he knew that was going to be done then i think its an amazing story.

Sal - posted on 07/06/2011

1,816

16

34

i think it is a HUGE pressure on the child, trying to fill that void for nan and living up the the ideal of the dead father, i wish the poor darling the hapiest of lives

Constance - posted on 07/06/2011

2,651

24

146

True I always said I wanted just 2 and look at me now I have 8. Yep I am nuts. LOL
Oh yeah are you following me? You keep popping up eveywhere tonight. LOL

Constance - posted on 07/06/2011

2,651

24

146

Yeah 1 should do it but with a surrogate it could be more 2 maybe 3. I wouldn't have more than one pregnacy though.
I wouldn't imagine that she would want to have more than one because he was her only child.

Constance - posted on 07/06/2011

2,651

24

146

I really don't know how many she would ty and plan for. I think them is just a better term then calling the baby/babies "it".
I know I probally would only have one. But eveyone is diffeent.

Katherine - posted on 07/06/2011

65,420

232

5195

But what about the word THEM? How many do you think she is planning to harvest? Geez I hope not a ton.....

Constance - posted on 07/06/2011

2,651

24

146

I think they will be ok. As long as she shows them nothing but love. Allows them to be who they are and not who thre father was then I think they will understand and be ok. It is defidently that something that needs to be discussed from very early on. Not waiting until they are teenagers what really happened. Allow them to know the truth.

Katherine - posted on 07/06/2011

65,420

232

5195

But all the luck to her and hope these children grow up in a loving home despite how they get there.

How do you think they will feel when they find out? Do you think she'll tell them. And them!!! Oh boy...

Stifler's - posted on 07/06/2011

15,141

154

604

I agree with Toni and Katherine, she's trying to DO something about his death (replace him with a grandchild) instead of dealing with her grief.

LadyJane - posted on 07/06/2011

162

7

1

I think it's fine. It does seem he was an only child and some families do in fact strive on keeping that family line alive. I see nothing wrong with that... A 44 yr old is not too old to have kids, but it would be a bit strange if she were to give birth to her son's child herself. Though it has happened before where the mom would act as surrogate to her daughter and son in law, as long as she was healthy and it was consented... In this case only she knows the truth of what her son would have wanted. Maybe they talked about this very thing. Who knows really. But all the luck to her and hope these children grow up in a loving home despite how they get there.

Katherine - posted on 07/06/2011

65,420

232

5195

I'm concerned that she is grieving the loss of her son and is trying to replace him almost with his child.


EXACTLY. That's exactly what I'm saying, Toni.

Katherine - posted on 07/06/2011

65,420

232

5195

I can't in all honesty say I wouldn't have done the same thing. Is it weird? Yes! Creepy? Yes! But I'm not sure, as a grieving parent my head would be on straight. I may have gone and done the same thing.

I'm just weirded out because even though he said he wanted kids.......well he didn't know he was going to DIE.

Stifler's - posted on 07/06/2011

15,141

154

604

I think the fact that one parent had no say or idea their child exists is a bit inethical.

Constance - posted on 07/06/2011

2,651

24

146

The biggest part that is missing is him. We don't know if they had that conversation before this. I can understand how her mind could go directly to having a grandchild. I know that when I lost a very close friend one of the first things that popped in my head was that he wasn't going to be a dad they way he had always dreamed. He would never be able to show a child how loving he was.
I know their are parents that have lost a child and then find out that they might have a child. They ae willing to do anything to know because it means that muxh to have a link to they lost child. It is different but as a mom I can understand why?

[deleted account]

I think the future child should be a very big concern. Why would you intentionally bring a child into this world who would not have his father? I know their are many circumstances where children are born to single parents, or widowed parents, that's different. As a child who has grown up without a parent, it's very difficult and causes all kinds of emotions. I think the mother is being selfish. If God had planned for her son to have a child he would have before his death.

Becky - posted on 07/06/2011

2,892

44

93

Sal, she's only 44. Younger than some moms having babies!
As to the question, I'm pretty sure it's not something I would do, or even think of doing, but I'm not sure I would say it's unethical. She is using an egg donor and surrogate at least. If she was having his baby herself, now that would be creepy as hell! It's going to be weird for the kid when it learns where it came from though!

Sal - posted on 07/06/2011

1,816

16

34

if he died of and accident why at the age of 21 did he give his mother the concent to havest sperm incase he died.....and i do see it as unethical, the mum really needed some therepy not a grand kid....as liz said he wanted to be a dad not a sperm doner, can anyone tell me how old the mum/grandmum is? if she is older i think it is a little cruel to make a baby that she isn't going to be around to look after so it is completely alone in the world after she dies

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms