agonyaunt | (no subject)

Dear Prudence,

My ex and I had a one-night stand that ended in a pregnancy. Neither one of us was in a position to be a parent, but she couldn’t stand the thought of getting an abortion. We actually did have a great family lined up to adopt the baby, but my ex’s religious nut of a mother messed with her head and guilted her into keeping the baby. At this point, I offered to sign away my parental rights because I was just tired of the entire situation. They accepted and the grandparents adopted the baby. I haven’t heard from them since and went on with my life.

The kid is now an adult and has been messaging me on social media and wants “answers.” I had already sent them our full medical history and a short explanation about the circumstances of the conception (aka us being young, dumb kids). I wished them well but said I would rather not continue contact. They still want “answers” and are asking to meet face-to-face. What are my ethical obligations here?

I have been told by other people the kid deserves closure but closure over what? There is a biological link but that is it. I had nothing to do with how they were raised and I don’t feel anything particular about them. I also don’t want to particularly cause them pain. What should I do?

—Sperm Donor

Dear Sperm Donor,

The kid does deserve closure. They didn’t ask to be born to someone who signed their right to parenthood away. But they’re not going to get closure—or anything of value —from a person who doesn’t “feel anything in particular about them” and who is clearly still bitter about the entire saga. Something about the tone of your letter tells me you’d cause your child more pain by being in touch than by remaining firm about no contact.

https://slate.com/human-interest/2022/10/wife-work-from-home-buddy-dear-prudence-advice.html

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

This dude. This dude!

Listen, meet with your adult child, don't meet with them, do whatever you want - but don't kid yourself here, LW. You had a lot to do with how they were raised.

You signed away your parental rights and allowed your child to be raised by, as you put it, your ex's "religious nut" parents.

Nobody forced you to do that. And maybe it was the best decision at the time, and maybe "I offered to sign away my parental rights because I was just tired of the entire situation" is just your way of pretending to yourself that you weren't over a barrel, but don't kid yourself. Either you didn't really have a choice, or you did, and you chose to offer up your kid to be raised in the same environment their mom was, even though you clearly didn't approve of it - in which case you did, actually have something to do with how this child was raised, LW.

I think he's worked hard to tell himself the guilt isn't his fault here. Given the tone and... everything, I imagine his behavior to and around the kid would also be unbalanced by the same issue, so it might be better for them not to talk to him even if they actually have fairly concrete questions and issues in mind for discussion.

Yep.

P.S. The kid would still deserve answers if they’d been adopted by the family that was expecting to adopt them in the first place.

Well, yes, but I think the columnist is right that LW is not really going to be able to provide them at this time due to his own personal issues. Which absolutely sucks, and I'd like to tell him to just suck it up, but I don't think that'd work.

I agree with Prudence here; the offspring may have some romantic notion about meeting their genetic father but nothing good is going to come of a face-to-face meeting. IMO the LW was something of a jerk a couple of decades ago, but now he's actually in the right. He owes the kid medical details and an explanation of their origins, which he's already provided; he doesn't owe the kid an ongoing relationship.

Also, the kid doesn't deserve closure, because nobody deserves closure, because closure is a myth. He has given the kid what the kid does deserve from him. He owes the kid exactly what he'd owe if the kid had been adopted, because as far as he was concerned, the child was adopted, by their grandparents. The bioparents of an adopted child don't need to meet the kid in person.

The LW is prioritizing the kid when he says "I also don't want to particularly cause them pain." The fact that he's sought advice on what to do shows how aware he is of himself, his feelings about the past, and how it would affect any meeting. This is a kindness. The kid has what they need. Insisting on pushing LW's boundaries will not get them what they want.

The general theme I've heard in DNA genealogy circles on this topic: You are entitled to information; you are not entitled to a relationship.

LW's given their offspring information. Sure, if LW were willing, he could meet the person he co-created, but LW isn't willing.

That said, one thing that's missing from LW's letter: are there other people who are entitled to know about the child who LW should give information to and give the option of contacting the child if they so choose? If LW has other children, they may be too young now, but at some point they should be told that they have a half-sibling; they might want to pursue a relationship as adults. If LW's parents are living, would they be interested in meeting their biological grandchild, and would the young person be interested in meeting them -- and does LW need to tell them they have a grandchild before they find out from the child contacting them or from taking DNA tests themselves?