Katrina Clark My Father Was An Anonymous Donor Analysis

1016 Words 5 Pages
Some say blood is thicker than water. However, is blood thicker than sperm? The argument about nature versus nurture has been going on for years. Do people really need to know where they come from to feel whole or even feel happy? In Katrina Clark’s article, “My Father was an Anonymous Sperm Donor,” Clark argues that children conceived from sperm donors deserve the right to know their fathers. Clark uses some history about sperm banks beginning to flourish in the 1980’s and 90’s. Also, Clark talks about how some maladies within that time period had happened. (1-2) While Clark’s history is somewhat credible, she uses mostly people’s pity to show her argument. Furthermore, Clark uses careless generalization and jabbers about other’s families …show more content…
In Clark’s experience, not knowing her father made her feel lost and disorientated. She states that children born into that situation did not get a choice to live without limitations and confusion. Clark states, “It’s hypocritical of parents and medical professionals to assume that biological roots won’t matter to the ‘products’ of cryobanks’ service, when longing for a biological relationship is what brings customers to the banks in the first place.” (1) What the author means by this is, everyone wants some sort of biological relationship. However, her mother will always be her biological mother. She mentions at a young age she was always jealous because one friend’s mother went through two divorces but her friend still knew a little about her dad. Clark was jealous of another friend because after her parents got divorced, she got all the attention and no one had offered Clark any sympathy or support like that. Once Clark’s mother got married, her new stepfather always got in the middle of their arguments. She told her stepfather that he had no authority over her because she had no father. (2) Therefore, Clark tries to grasp the reader’s attention by making them feel bad for her but has no evidence to further her …show more content…
By using the statement, “We offspring are recognizing the right that was stripped from us at birth – the right to know both of our parents,” she is implying that all children born in the same or similar situation feel the same that she does. (1) However, this may not be the case. She never mentions other situations or even evidence of children in the same situation feeling the same way. People go to sperm banks for many reasons. She fails to mention the good that sperm banks do. These cryrobanks help women with biological clocks ticking who want to give a child a life. It even helps couples who can’t have kids due to low sperm count, poor motility, and abnormal morphology of sperm. (Womens-health.co.uk) Clark also fails to mention that sperm donor children don’t suffer from any greater social, psychological, or emotional problems than traditional families. (Telegraph.co.uk)In an article called, “Sperm Donor Children Are Fine without Fathers,” Cambridge University proves the statement through research between traditional and sperm donor families. Clark doesn’t use any other information other than her own experience within the article. By assuming that all sperm donor children feel just as she does on the topic, she fails to prove her

Related Documents