Help
Sign In
Genetics
February 2009 
If you can't have children, that's a sign that you shouldn't
Posted on Jun 9th, 2008
by 
Scott
Scott
Remember when, if you couldn't have children, that was taken to be a sign that your genes weren't actually healthy enough to be passed on? You know, the way it works with every other animal species on the planet?
Well, let's celebrate the miracles of modern medicine, and the unbelievable fixation most people have on sexual reproduction. It all adds up to a multi-billion dollar industry dedicated to trying really hard to see that people who genetically shouldn't have children have them anyway.
And not only are we supposed to be impressed with this, we're supposed to feel sorry for those who have finally given up on fertility treatments, after emptying their bank accounts on it. This makes my head explode.
Having biological offspring is not a right. If your genetics are not fit to be passed on... that's a really strong sign from the universe that you shouldn't have children. Isn't it?!? Am I crazy?
I'm just really getting sick of seeing stories about couples who spend years "trying" only to get more and more frustrated. It's a story they told themselves about the way their lives would go... if it doesn't happen, you have to deal with it just like you dealt with the fact that you settled down and bought sensible cars and got a Costco membership card.
Sorry, this is pure rant, but in a world where there actually are so many children up for adoption who would thrive in a loving home, seeing all of that money and time and worry spent on trying to get around the strong hint from Nature makes me sick. If you want a child in your house (and, let me be clear, I do not) then there are plenty to choose from.
Well, let's celebrate the miracles of modern medicine, and the unbelievable fixation most people have on sexual reproduction. It all adds up to a multi-billion dollar industry dedicated to trying really hard to see that people who genetically shouldn't have children have them anyway.
And not only are we supposed to be impressed with this, we're supposed to feel sorry for those who have finally given up on fertility treatments, after emptying their bank accounts on it. This makes my head explode.
Having biological offspring is not a right. If your genetics are not fit to be passed on... that's a really strong sign from the universe that you shouldn't have children. Isn't it?!? Am I crazy?
I'm just really getting sick of seeing stories about couples who spend years "trying" only to get more and more frustrated. It's a story they told themselves about the way their lives would go... if it doesn't happen, you have to deal with it just like you dealt with the fact that you settled down and bought sensible cars and got a Costco membership card.
Sorry, this is pure rant, but in a world where there actually are so many children up for adoption who would thrive in a loving home, seeing all of that money and time and worry spent on trying to get around the strong hint from Nature makes me sick. If you want a child in your house (and, let me be clear, I do not) then there are plenty to choose from.
Access: Public
As an adoptive parent myself (my wife and I have been blessed with two wonderful little boys from two separate private placements) I entirely support your arguement.
We spent years going down the 'assisted fertility' road until we finally clued in that this wasn't how we were intended to build our family.
Once we were able to let go of our ego-fueled desire to reproduce and realize that what truly desired most was to parent, the move to adoption was a wonderful one.
Thanks for saying that… I'm truly happy that, for someone at least, I did get right the notion that egoic contraction is what's deeply tied up in the quest for biological reproduction.
I'll add that it's difficult for me to relate to that anymore. I mean, I still have sexual urges (no doubt) but with my belief in the truth of reincarnation I see having children very much in terms of providing care for another soul who has incarnated, rather than as a link to imagined immortality. I see my immortality in Self, and my mission during this life simply to be present with as much grace and wisdom as I can continue to tap into through all of my practices.
From that perspective, the difference between providing care for biological offspring vs. adopted children narrows considerably, and the source of love that one brings to the task moves from protecting one's own sense of life and legacy to a more universal perspective on love and grace. At least, I hope it does.
If you are born without feet, it's a sign that you shouldn't walk.
(The resources dedicated to prosthesis should be directed elsewhere, according to the discretion of some group or individual.)
If you are born with an irregularly shaped cornea, it's a sign you should not see clearly.
(The resources dedicated to corrective lenses should be directed elsewhere, according to the discretion of some group or individual.)
If at age 17, you are 5'9” and weigh 135 pounds, it's a sign that you should not become a body builder.
(The resources dedicated to protein shakes should be directed elsewhere, according to the discretion of some group or individual.)
If you are intent on realizing the end of suffering, but have not figured it out after 5 years, you should go back to your palace and the family you left behind.
(The resources dedicated to meditation should be directed elsewhere, according to the discretion of some group or individual… Someone else will have better luck with Enlightenment.)
Hi Mark! I hope you're doing well, we should catch up soon.
So, yes, I hear you. And, yes, all things can be overcome. And, in fact, given medical advances, even fertility help will probably grow inexpensive and common over the next 20-30 years.
I'm just tired of hearing stories around fertility treatment of people emptying bank accounts and going through divorces and treating it like a psychological trauma. I wasn't born being able to run fast… should I mourn that, or go for expensive medical procedures, to try to correct that? Should I create a support group for those who can't run fast? Is that a worthwhile use of my resources? Is that a worthwhile use of medical research and technology? Or is it just my ego violating the old prayer about having the patience to accept things, the strength to change things, and the wisdom to be able to tell the difference….
It's not for me to dictate those choices to anyone, I agree, and the world is far better off that an idiot like me doesn't have such power. Besides, as a capitalist, I do believe in the free market. We have lots of pills to help men still have an erection, and lots of plastic surgery available, and we're not exactly talking about a life-threatening condition. Give the people what they want.
I reserve the right to rant when I'm tired of hearing about it, though, and this topic really strikes me not as sad, but pathetic. Wrapped up in ego about what should be… where's Byron Katie on this topic? And with a perfect option, adoption, available…. Just my thoughts on the subject.
Scott, I don’t believe that genetics always plays a role in not being able to have kids. Remember it takes two to have them, and one partner may be just fine and fertile while the other one isn’t. Also, adoption is not the perfect solution, as you claim. There are instances of attachment disorder in adopted children, which makes the adoptive parents’ life a living hell. And let’s not forget the high bank-breaking cost of adoption wither. It can be $30K and up - and that doesn’t guarantee the adoption even going through. There are failed adoptions as well. My wife and I miscarried and are now unable to conceive. That said, we looked into adoption and were dismayed and discouraged by the paperwork and cost.