Wow Great !!!! things are back to normal with discussions on the 'issue' instead of talking unrelated stuffs like Vegs Vs Non Vegs :wink: :lol: :P 8)
Easy folks easy !!! 8)
Printable View
Wow Great !!!! things are back to normal with discussions on the 'issue' instead of talking unrelated stuffs like Vegs Vs Non Vegs :wink: :lol: :P 8)
Easy folks easy !!! 8)
Cygnus,Quote:
Originally Posted by Cygnus
Like mellon did, you are also ascribing a lot of things that I have neither mentioned nor implied.
I have never used the word "should" .. I have always approached life with an element of cynicism about myself that I could be wrong.
I have not passed any judgment, moral or otherwise, about the couple who intend to have their own biological child at the exclusion of any other option. I was only suggesting an other alternative, a better one according to me, if only they can alter their outlook. I have stated, given a particular mindset, the issue is not arguable. If they believe there is no alternative to a genetic child, then end of the argument. Period.
But the irrevocable truth, which can be realised only with an extremely open mind, is that there is no difference between the love I have towards my daughter and my son.
Also I am raising a basic question, the answer to which may be different to different people...
Why do we want to have children?
I think, it is an innate desire to procreate our speciies. (Not necessarily our genes)
It is also due to the urge for loving and being loved in its purest form, which results in a complete family. If so, any child can be yours if you love it. If you have any mental riders to this, then there is some cost involved, which may include the guilt of involving someother's life and emotions. If you are ready to pay that and other costs, the option is yours.
Again, if the reason to have a child is extraneous, like an investment for the future, or competition with rivals, then my views are less kind towards them.
But IF it, is only to escape from the social aspersions of being called 'barren', there cannot be a meaner reason than this to bring a life on to this earth. If you call this moral, I cannot call any thing else immoral.
The issue of having an issue is intricately wound round many primal instincts and nurtured by social customs. In our country where “living together” has not taken root yet, where we still trade woman WITH cash and chattel in marriage business, where we widely avail the service of “matrimonial ads” angling for tall, fair brides and software engineers in MNC’s, marriage is a big issue in the first place. Next, the first question asked by anyone meeting the bride a few days after marriage is “any special news?”( in Tamil “Ethaavathu vishEshamuNdaa?).
Having an offspring in hands at the completion of ten months after marriage is the best risk-free, care-free choice and luck of many couples. Crossing this time limit starts the persistent queries from any and everybody. We are not a “sensitive” people to consider this potential matter a private issue. After all it is pure, genuine concern about progeny- the ultimate aim of marriage. Whether we like it or not “to grow and multiply” is the design of Nature. It is an inborn urge. Thus it is an understandable matter how the pressure mounts for issueless couples.
In bygone days adoption was the only choice and as science and technology has grown, multiple choices are made available for the couples who feel they must have an issue by all means. (We shall not forget that some couples decide to live for each other, without resorting to any method to prolong the family line.) It would differ depending on the temperament, the wealthy position and exposure to broadminded ideas of the individuals concerned.
The very natural, undebatable desire of all parents-to-be is to have children who mirror them in looks and characteristics. The whole family and community supports this basic desire. “It runs in the family” is something to take pride in. These fundamental, primal instincts cant be helped.
A superior mind which has crossed the barriers of narrow considerations can transcend mundane expectations in a pursuit of pure, sublime, humane love. A Shekhar can think, feel otherwise than this normal herd. But Shekhars are a pathetic minority. Let us be realistic.
So nowadays issueless couples if they can afford it resort to surrogacy, yielding to a compulsive, primal instinct. It is a very human thing to do- IF it did not involve so much sacrifice on the part of the surrogate mother. I am not passing any judgement. A particle of “humanness” is missing in this transaction, in my opinion-it is a sort of heartless business contract from the surrogate mother’s point of view. To think poverty is the reason for the surrogate mother’s consent made me feel sad. That was the mood in which I started this issue about issue.
To love an adopted child also requires real generosity of heart. Are step-mother stories unheard of? This is similar to that. There can be, there have been wonderful step-mothers.
An ideal policy of marital love and family ties as Shekhar has are very rare. Those who don’t have it need feel no regret either. It takes all sorts of people to make the world. To conclude animal-like attachment to one’s own “flesh and blood” literally is quite understandable. Whether it is acceptable or not is not ours to decide.
PP Ma'm,
Wow! Excellent and balanced post. :thumbsup:
Shekhar, please tell me how else one would interpret the statement -Quote:
Originally Posted by Shekhar
*** If they are bent upon having genetic offspring inspite of their natural inability to produce a baby, ruling out adoption, then they must be ready to face the complications and difficulties. *** if not assuming that you implied that childless couples excluding adoption are selfish despite their natural deficiency which precludes them from pusuing other ways of begetting a child except adoption.
Let me reiterate that that I am not arguing for a personal stance, substantiating my choice. I don't want to color this issue with my personal choices. Regardless of what my choice is, what is my tolerance towards oters' choices - is the moral compass that steers this conversation for me. I could not make concise affirmative statements when the issue this deep and wide involving the decliate emotions and lives of many people.
PP, please accept my heartfelt thanks for your indepth analysis of the issue from many conceivable angles . I have echoed your thoughts in my all my posts that the desire to precreate is an innate drive that has led us to the present situation. It is not for us to decide upon the propriety of the many choices and the many struggles for clarity that have sprung from the choices. But it behooves us to embrace and learn to live with the variegations of our humanness.
Adoption has its own complications as well. Especially very emotional ones hanging between the biological parents and the real parents is NOT COMPLETELY eliminated. It is never risk-free!Quote:
Originally Posted by Shekhar
It all depends on the individaul couple's maturity and morality as what they believe in, to deal with the situation and, the adoption may not be a best solution for some couples at least. They may very well be happy with "their own children" rather than adopting "other's children" 8)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shekhar
You know what Shekhar, it is ALWAYS the people those have different view than what we(u) have, GET ALL WRONG.
I see you are SAYING that in every post as they getting all wrong but u should know that THEY FEEL THE SAME WAY about YOU!
I thought u should know that YOU ARE NOT ALONE and u r not the only one whose posts all have been MISUNDERSTOOD and MISINTERPRETED 8)
Fine..Got your point.
But why big bold letters?! :roll:
Do you know who shouts?!! :) :)
LOL@Shekhar !!!! :rotfl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Shekhar
Cygnus.. Of course I know that. You are too mature to do that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cygnus
However strongly I was arguing my point of view, I had and have respect for yours. May be I lagged in my effort to look at the issue from your point of view.
PP Madam's post made me think a lot about my view point, or rather the 'rigidity' of my view point. I realised that I lacked the sensitiveness to understand the emotions of childless couple. This is where I realised that your sensitiveness and empathy in understanding the pangs of the childless couple is commendable. My view is flawed by two of my limitations. One is, being a man I lack the sensibility of a woman to understand the craving of a mother. The other is my lack of association with childless couple. My conviction has come from my own experience of having a child and almost forgetting she is not my natural child. But the draw back is that no one else can know what it is till they experience it. This truth cannot be 'told'. And I was precisely trying to do that.
We, in our infirmities, vehemently try to argue, mistaking our personal truths to be universal truths. I forgot for a while, that my truth is a personal one, true nevertheless, but cannot be a universal one. It is an infirmity on my part to expect others to accept my point of view. If someone had talked to me about adoption before I took my daughter, may be I would have reacted in a similar way you did.
I have not had close contact with childless couples, so I lacked the sensitivenss towards their problem. At the same time you have not seen my daughters relationship with me and my family. So such a solution doesn't enthuse you. Well it needed a PP mam to see both sides of the coin.
Is it a coincidence, that she is a woman? Honestly, I don't think so..