Search Results

This chapter introduces Part II of this book. It begins by noting how David Letterman used humor to shirk fatherhood's responsibilities before his child was even born. His comments bespeak a larger ideal concept of being a dad, an ideal that he may fear he cannot measure up to because of his age. Letterman reveals both what the American family is supposed to look like, as well as his own personal failure to live up to those expectations. The chapters that make up Part II underscore the power of cultural norms to define how families should be. Often norms are revealed only when they are broken. Single-mother families not only reveal deeply held beliefs both about family membership and family content but also offer to people the opportunity to rethink the confusion surrounding genetic and social kinship in America, since there is no longer a tight fit between the two.

This chapter introduces the members of the 7008er network at the occasion of a significant gathering, when seven families with children born from the same sperm donor come together at a hotel in the Midwest. From the beginning, the children in this network seek to construct themselves as a family. Love, trust, and harmony serve as guideposts in the unscripted land of donor-linked families. They also use structures they know from traditional families, such as a sibling pecking order. As the group expands to incorporate new members, the original narrative of family membership fails to describe the reality of competing allegiances among teenagers. Instead of remaining a coherent group, the members of this network break into a number of separate factions. Born between 1995 and 2001, the kids interviewed are between fifteen and nineteen years old.

The parents in the Social Capitalist network introduce a set of new ideas about the meaning of relationships with donor siblings. Rather than trying to squeeze themselves into any preexisting model of family, they actively negotiate their own rules for interaction and for language (including use of the word “dibling”). They also introduce a set of new ideas about the benefits the group can provide. They state quite clearly that they value the social and cultural capital available through group membership. The parents scurry to become members early (while their children are under the age of five) because they want both to influence the group’s formation and to secure the benefits they hope their children will receive in years to come. Because the children are so young, we hear only from the parents.

The members of the Tourists are not really sure what they are looking for when they connect with other people to whom they are connected by reliance on the same sperm donor. The mere existence of donor siblings is a novelty to the members of this network, but like tourists who are only curious about the sites in a different land, a brief visit with the others suffices. Interestingly, the donor makes himself known to this network, but he too is a tourist who sets clear limits on what he has to offer the children born from his sperm donation. The Facebook group and holiday cards sent within the network are reminders of membership, but there is little other interaction. Born between 1994 and 2001, the kids interviewed are between sixteen and nineteen years old.

The Soul Mates network is distinctive on two counts. First, it is a large network with over twenty-two children. Second, it represents a turning point in network creation: the initial group formed when all of the children were toddlers. The children in this network thus have known about donor siblings for as long as they can remember. Among the members of this network one finds neither group cohesion nor bland disinterest. Rather the network provides opportunities for pairs of parents and pairs of children to find particular meaning in their relationships with each other. The fact that there is a medical issue of autism spectrum disorder (which might come from the donor) running through some offspring complicates—and sometimes intensifies —these relationships. Born between 2003 and 2006, the children interviewed are eleven- and twelve-year-olds.