That has nothing to do with this child, since she wasn’t adopted. She’s with her biological mother and she is living in a home that reflects half her racial heritage. The vast majority of biracial children are probably not adopted by people who match the racial make up of their biological parents, though.
It has everything to do with the agreement between the woman and the sperm bank. The Genetic makeup of the child was chosen ahead of time just as it is in an adoption.
And just as it is when a woman has a child naturally. Choosing the father for your own biological child is not, in effect, like adopting a living, unrelated child.
You do realize this is easy to say, but hard to do in reality right? Not everyone has the financial resources to just up and move and cut off all contact with their family, not to mention the emotional cost of doing that.
There is also an enormous difference between raising a child in a racist environment where they aren’t the target, and raising a child who will be the target of the hate. It doesn’t matter where you live, your child is going to encounter people with positions you disagree with, the most you can do is talk about it.
She had the financial resources to pay thousands of dollars for the treatment. She also received a refund in that amount which she could use to move.
But it’s not a positive environment in either case.
It is from the aspect that the genetic makeup is chosen ahead of time.
I’m really not sure why you’re not getting this basic concept. She made a very specific choice just as if she married the donor or adopted a child.
If she wasn’t prepared to handle hard reality, it was a mistake for her to have pursued parenthood. That’s my point.
What would she be doing if the kid had a serious health problem that indicated a move to an area with better specialty medical care? Just sit around waiting for a check for $50K to fall from the heaven? What would she do if she had to deal with a child molestor for an uncle rather than a racist one? Would she seriously need to weigh (and monetize) the emotional cost in severing ties with this person against the emotional cost this person poses to her daughter?
I’ve never claimed that she didn’t make a very specific choice, and I’m not sure why you would assume that there are people who don’t understand that she made a choice. Her choice does not mean that “She in effect adopted the offspring.” She made the same choice that everyone who has a biological child made, and no one would claim that those people “in effect adopted the offspring.” It does not answer the question of why this woman’s choice to have her own biological child is being compared to cases where people adopt the children of two unrelated people.
If I may hazard a guess, the harping on adoption is a symptom of how black people are still “otherized” and treated taxonomically separate from whites.
The refrain “the mother wanted a child that looks like her…” is another symptom of this. As if her daughter can’t possibly look like her just because she’s black. As if those little squirts of African blood in her DNA masks the considerable amount of European in her veins.
No. Some of us agree that she deserves compensation because she didn’t get the donor she chose. If the erroneous donor had been Japanese/Native American/Filipino/Pakistani/whatever she’d still entitled to compensation.
Please quote who “insist that there’s some kind of terrible stigma attached to her being black”. Here. In this thread.
Have you read Dangerosa’s posts? You could try that for a start. Not only has she said the above and then some, but she’s arguing that the mother deserves compensation because “oh noes, black people’s economic worth is lower than whites!”
I’m not quoting anything for you because you’re obviously a literate person and are capable of reading the thread just like I have. The arguments you’re claiming no one is making are already neatly laid out for you. While “some” of you are saying some things, others are clearly saying a lot more than that.
WTF! Do you think you with the face, brickbacon, Omega Glory, and I have been arguing with ourselves this whole time?
If she were just suing because she only wanted a little towhead, I wouldn’t even be participating in the discussion because it’s unlikely there would be posters saying anything as ridiculous as what’s been said in this thread. If it was something as simple as this, she wouldn’t have mentioned her family’s racism, long-distance beauty salons, or having to move to a more diverse area. She wouldn’t have needed a psychiatrist. There would be no one saying that as a black person, statistically Payton is more likely to act out in school and need special services, and thus represents a defective product for this lady. That has been what we’ve been reacting to.
And lookahere…every single one of us have said that we agree that she’s deserving of compensation for having been screwed over (whether it’s the refund or a little extra to smooth things over). We just don’t agree that she’s entitled to damages based on her current (crazy) line of argumentation.
OK. I totally agree with most of what you’ve been saying, except I’m willing to allow for her argumentation being on the advice of her attorneys. When I’ve been in a situation requiring an attorney I remember suggesting, “well what about abc?”. My attorney pointed out that what I thought was important in the matter wouldn’t help me win in court and rather we should emphasize xyz. We won.
I think she (and her daughter) deserve compensation. If they need to game the system a bit, without suborning perjury, so what? She obviously loves her kid.
It occurs to me if this were a case about “wrongful” gender instead of race, the plaintiff could argue she’s damaged because globally, females are disfavored over males, women make less money than men, and females are more likely to be victims of sexual violence than men. And if they had wanted a girl but got a boy instead, they could argue that boys are more likely to suffer from neurological impairments, learning disabilities, conduct disorders, psychopathy, and criminality. They could argue they are ill-equipped to raise a boy, as two women, and thus need to move closer to an area where there are more positive male role models.
How much money would it take for you to get on a stand and say you wish your kid hadn’t been born?
Because I’d hope my mother wouldn’t sell me out for $50K. I might understand if it was for two million and her chances of winning were good. But for $50K? Yeah, that doesn’t exactly say “love” to me. That says, “I don’t give a fuck about your feelings. Mama needs a new pair of shoes.”
Even if I agreed that such a repugnant argument was likely to be more successful (which I highly doubt), I doubt anyone who actually loved there kid would make such a move for short term gain. At best, she will get a fairly inconsequential amount of money. Is that worth broadcasting to the world that you see your daughter as defective and burdensome? Is it worth establishing a precedent that views non majority characteristics as an actionable harm?
I couldn’t do that, it would be perjury. But I could stretch things a bit. If my lawyer put me on the stand and asked me certain things in a certain way, I’d answer truthfully. And my attorney, knowing this, would frame the questions in a way I could tolerate.
Now stop it before you change my mind.
Actually, a couple of people have said that she’s not due any compensation at all. I don’t count you among them. The refund was part of the fees, and yes, it would be “thousands of dollars” because it’s not cheap.
I do see your reasoning here, but I see it more like having a child with physical disabilities due to the hospital’s negligence vs having a child with disabilities because shit happens. The former you can sue for, the latter not, despite the outcome being the same.
Even though I do dislike equating being mixed-race with having a disability, because it obviously isn’t, it’s still a clear disadavantage in the world we live in. Even more so if your mixed-race kid has the extra disadvantage of living somewhere there are very few other non-whites and having only white people for parents.
I thought it was about not introducing extra harm that the parents hadn’t planned for or taken into account, not just not having any harm at all. If you are two white people with a white donor you’re not going to be reasonably prepared for having a kid that is not white.
It’s one of the main mechanisms to stop companies behaving badly, yes. It’s not all that exists to stop people commiting fraud, but it is one of the key items. It’s not all or nothing.
And I’m sure race isn’t the only trait that differs between the donors. If her chosen donor was significantly taller or skinnier than the one she received, the mother could argue that by receiving “short genes” or “fat genes” her daughter has been saddled with disadvantage too. And she would look just as silly and self-entitled as she does now.
Almost anyone could qualify as disadvantaged depending on how they are sliced and diced. To treat this child like a faceless statistic just to argue that she is worth less than a white child (and yes, that’s exactly what that argument implies) is not only offensive. It’s stupid. Anyone who has looked at the girl’s picture can see that she is gorgeous. As with any child, her life is a blank slate full of promise.
I hope she reads this thread one day and is able to laugh at the doom and gloom predictions made about her future.
It is not obvious to me. What makes this obvious?
Lol!
“I love you, but you’re not what I wanted” is not something a kid should ever hear. Ever. All the mother would need to do to is imagine her own parents saying the same to her for being gay.