artificial insemination should there be limit?

Yeah, I think there should be more limitations. Just how society accepts that a man shouldn't marry 150 women, he shouldn't have children with that many, which is essentially the same thing, right? There's nothing wrong with a few sperm donations, but I'd set the limit for any person at about 5, unless there is something about them which is genetically superior to average humans.
 
accidental incest? moar liek accidental WINCEST amirite

but seriously, since people tend to be attracted to people who are (and look) like themselves I think that particular risk might be worth worrying about but i dunno

Makes me think, what if a college kid sells some sperm, and then later on the kid grows up and somehow they end up meeting and falling in love without realizing?
 
What happens if half-brothers and -sisters from this man's sperm end up marrying -or not- and having kids?
 
What happens if half-brothers and -sisters from this man's sperm end up marrying -or not- and having kids?

There's two things at play, inbreeding and incest. As for inbreeding, half-siblings are the same as two cousins marrying: genetically it's not an issue (unless you continue the inbreeding for many generations). Incest is more of a social taboo. Considering the hypothetical half-siblings didn't grow up with one another, I don't think there's any real "Ewwww" factor -- being a sibling, or a parent for that matter, is a lot more about actions than it is genetics.
 
Barring disease or genetic malfunction, what possible justification would there be to restrict this?
 
You have to give the man a hand for being able to do that. :clap:

But you better take his left hand :p


I think the moral issue lies somewhere else. If the sperm bank allows the woman to choose a donor based on his available data, many women will choose only from a very small group of men based on handsomeness and achieved education. I wonder why this is socially accepted when a woman does that but arkward when unnatural selection is promoted by the government.
 
Hopefully, the banks will start noting (for the patient), how many time each person has been 'used'. If you found out your father-to-be already had 'donated' to 10 women, you might not choose him
 
If he's willing to provide his services frequently enough to impregnate 150 women, sure.

I initially thought the thread was going to be about a limit on the women, in which case as long as they can financially support the extra child that's fine.
 
I don't see a problem with this.
As contre said, inbreeding between half-siblings isn't really an issue if it doesn't become family tradition.
I don't know how sperm banks operate and if there is some central institution, but it should be enough to have quotas per state/city/county/whatever.
1500 children per donor wouldn't be a problem if they are evenly distributed between the states.
 
I wonder why this is socially accepted when a woman does that but arkward when unnatural selection is promoted by the government.

Mostly a justified perception that the government will abuse the authority. Within the past 100 years we've had forcible sterilizations of "undesirable" people...but there is no system of government that should be trusted to make that definition. In a democratic government, anyone can be "undesirable" if 50% + 1 of the population says so. In a non-democratic system, the definition of "undesirable" is whatever the unaccountable authorites say it is.

If an individual woman doesn't want me to be the father of her child, no big deal--she can't stop me from going elsewhere.
 
I don't see a problem with this.
As contre said, inbreeding between half-siblings isn't really an issue if it doesn't become family tradition.
I don't know how sperm banks operate and if there is some central institution, but it should be enough to have quotas per state/city/county/whatever.
1500 children per donor wouldn't be a problem if they are evenly distributed between the states.
Why not have children the normal way?
 
Top Bottom