Sexual Reproduction for Same Sex Couples?

Just find a donor. You don't need "parts" of both of you for your child to be considered
"yours". If you really feel the pressing need to have both children considered "yours", then find a surrogate for each of you.

This whole thing sounds ridiculous and the children would probably grow up with all sorts of cancers and other health problems.

 

Hmm, it sounds a little risky in terms of not fully knowing how the child would turn out, but it's a nice thought I guess. I agree that I would rather have a child completely with the person I love rather than some random surrogate - not that that's not a wonderful gift a person can give you.

I think I'd rather adopt over surrogacy or this new route, I don't think I could take the whole process of somebody carrying my child that I don't love and the possibility of them getting attached and wanting to stick around. I'd much rather give an already living child a good home.

 

Something about this whole thing seems wrong ethically. I'm not sure why, but I don't think it's wise to tamper with the human body to this extent. Sorry.

 

There are major risks associated with this. Similar to cloning, the manipulation of the cell membrane affects meiosis when in turn affects the quality control mechanisms of the cell cycle during mitosis. Their are scientists working to fix this issue and I think it will happen eventually, but it is not something that will become available in the near future. There are clinical trials for cloning, but they do not have the support of the scientific community. Out of desperation people sign up for these things and argue that even if there are complications they will love and nurture the offspring. I don't find this ethical at all. They argue that the risk is higher based on statistics of natural birthing methods of having genetic issues, but personally I find that argument weak at best. The biggest problem is that the genes do not transcribe properly during replication on a consistent basis. Again this is shown when you look at the DNA of current cloned offspring. Give it 10 more years and I will reevaluate my stance.

 

While the science is cool, I do feel uneasy about it. I don't like the thought of something going wrong and brining a person into this world with major health problems.

 

Yeah I'm kinda finding this ethically wrong. I mean changing a sperm into an egg or egg into a sperm? I mean they're sperm and eggs for a reason, changing them from how they were born to me is like trying to change a gay man or woman straight (even though that's not possible, I'm just making the comparison). It just shouldn't really work that way.

 

I personally would go the surrogate route over this. I've already had some of my best friends offer to do it for me if I ever ask them to.
I just don't think the method proposed by this article is ethical, like others. A sperm and an egg are what they are for a reason. We shouldn't go changing it like this.

 

It sounds like too much work and also too much risk to the future child, imo. There are lots of other ways same sex couples can have kids in this day and age: adoption, sperm donation, surrogacy, etc. I'd just stick to that myself.

 

I think I remember reading a blurb in a newspaper a few years ago about scientist finding ways to create sperm cells from female bone marrow. But I may very well be wrong.