« Are There Any Men Listening? | Main | Reversing the Irreversible. Microscopic Vasectomy Reversal. »

06/14/2010

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

[Another commenter said"] “…an organization like the AFA should have conducted this study…”

That’s a great idea. I hope the AFA *will* do a study on the experience of adults who were conceived through gamete donation.

Also, to clarify [in response to another commenter], the Institute for American Values as an organization has no official position on same sex marriage. Among our leaders, board, staff, and the bloggers at our family issues blog — FamilyScholars.org — there are a variety of views. On this as on many matters we are an ensemble, not a chorus.

Sincerely,
Elizabeth Marquardt
Co-investigator, My Daddy’s Name is Donor
Vice President for Family Studies

The study from my understanding was not backed, supported, or funded by a nonbiased organization. I believe the Institute for American Values which doesn't support gay marriage backed this study. I have a hard time thinking this study was nonbiased.

I have a problem with an organization that doesn't recognize families that are not traditional with a mom and a dad.

An organization like the AFA should have conducted this study because the AFA is not biased and recognizes that what makes a marriage is commitment and love. Not just a man and a woman. They also recognize and support different ways of creating a family.

Most importantly -- what I think the study is missing is the fact that those of us who have created our families through sperm donation or egg donation have done so mindfully and above all we really really love our children.

http://familyscholars.org/2010/06/14/response-from-norval-d-glenn-co-investigator-of-my-daddys-name-is-donor/

Response from Norval D. Glenn, Co-Investigator of ‘My Daddy’s Name is Donor’
Elizabeth Marquardt 06.14.2010, 12:57 PM

by Norval D. Glenn

Some critics claim that the study on sperm donor conceived offspring is pseudo-science and that studies such as this one support the pre-existing prejudices and assumptions of the authors or the organization financing the work.

This study was done by standard scientific methods accepted in the social sciences. This is the first national study on this topic. Because gathering the data from sperm donor conceived children is difficult, the research used the best survey methods available. The researchers were aware of the limitations on the gathering of data and laid it out in a lucid discussion in the Methodology and Limitations section. The researchers made it clear that this was an initial national study of this group of subjects. This does not make the study pseudo-science.

Steve Nock of the University of Virginia (now deceased) and I were the primary social scientific designers of the study. I had no pre-existing prejudice and I had not made any assumptions when I was asked to work on this project.

The study does not set out to explain all the complex issues involved in the lives of sperm donor children and does not claim to do so. The aim of the study was to report some initial findings in order to bring attention to a subject matter that warrants further investigation.

Norval D. Glenn

Ashbel Smith Professer

Stiles Professor

University of Texas at Austin

June 14, 2010

The comments to this entry are closed.

Tip Jar

Donate Change

Tip Jar

Categories

TypePad Profile

Get updates on my activity. Follow me on my Profile.
Blog powered by Typepad