Foo - Would you consider not having children if you had poor genes?

Would you consider not reproducing for the fact that you yourself carry some bad genetics? For example, you have very bad vision, breast cancer (or another form of cancer) runs in your family very strongly and most family members are affected by it, and/or depression or other psychological disorders run in your family, ect...

Do you think it would be wrong to bring another life into this world where there may be a very strong chance they develop something? Anyone considered this or even decided to not have kids becuase of it? Just curious. Thanks

it didn't stop my parents.

it didn't stop my parents.

:roflmao::roflmao:

... Brad

it didn't stop my parents.

http://img168.echo.cx/img168/3825/laughing13oc.gif

My jeans are all torn up. D:

Mediocre DNA or not, I'm not having kids. I'd rather have nice cars and more freedom.

One can know so much nowadays.... I suspect that the things one really learns now is enough to abort most very unviable fetuses very early on. I really don't know from personal experience anymore. But if one learns of a particular susceptibility which is likely to present during the life of the fetus, and if the parents can arrange for care of such, assuming that the "deformity" is one of life-enduring consequences, then why not give life to that child, assuming that a way to care for it, longterm, is planned....

Just askin'.... I knew some parents who did that in the 60's. This gal is now a productive member of society via a special program that only became available in recent years. And she enjoys playing doubles tennis with a particular voracity (like her dad).... And she could kick my butt. :-)

Mediocre DNA or not, I'm not having kids. I'd rather have nice cars and more freedom.

+1 (except not cars... maybe bikes or horses)

But if one learns of a particular susceptibility which is likely to present during the life of the fetus, and if the parents can arrange for care of such, assuming that the "deformity" is one of life-enduring consequences, then why not give life to that child, assuming that a way to care for it, longterm, is planned....

And thereby adding undesirable traits into the gene pool.

Not necessarily saying that's my point of view... not saying it isn't, either... just putting a different perspective out there.

Baybuh, when you are with the right person, you will accept the most minimally-acceptable person into life, and you will find a way to support the difficult cause of that small one. You will find a way not only to support that little one, but you'll find a way to support research that supports that little one's living. And this is good, and it betters the effort of science to support them, and others who come after them, as callous as that sounds. I've been there.

Love them, give them the best life you can. But be prepared for the fact that, for some, life very unceremoniously and abruptly ends...

I'm so sorry if this is the case....

And thereby adding undesirable traits into the gene pool.

Not necessarily saying that's my point of view... not saying it isn't, either... just putting a different perspective out there.

Well thats if the said person reproduces, the probability of which is probably pretty small but still finite. A dilemma indeed.

Me, personally, I would try to reason with the other half to see if I can get away with not having children in that case.

Baybuh, it's very human to want children. If you know of a specific "DNA" issue aforehand, why not "chance" like so many of us have? You surely know of probable "issues" by now?

I have perfectly good genes and don't intend on having children anyway -- and to be honest I don't think it matters in the grand scheme of things. Just take a walk to any shopping centre around here on a Saturday afternoon, or watch the way the notorious Gold Coast motorists behave at anytime, and you'll soon realise that plenty of people with bad genes have already made the decision to have children (and no, this is not a humorous or sarcastic post in any way). Personally, I'd feel more guilt about bringing someone into that environment than anything I'd be leaving behind.

The advances in medicine, technology, computers, etc. are consistently revolutionizing what can be done for children born with disabilities. There are people all around you that you don't even know have depression, or bipolar disorder, or were born with heart problems, or born deaf. New medications, new surgical breakthroughs, artificial limbs. The list goes on and on. No guarantees, but heh, if you want to have kids, do it. P.S. My son was expected to die a day after being born 3 months early. 70% chance he would have a disability. And no, we didn't have to have him. He's now the coolest effing 13-year old I know:D

I don't see what the holes in my blue jeans have to do with anything! :(

Would you consider not reproducing for the fact that you yourself carry some bad genetics? For example, you have very bad vision, breast cancer (or another form of cancer) runs in your family very strongly and most family members are affected by it, and/or depression or other psychological disorders run in your family, ect...

Do you think it would be wrong to bring another life into this world where there may be a very strong chance they develop something? Anyone considered this or even decided to not have kids becuase of it? Just curious. Thanks


I have thought about this quite a bit. My parents, grand parents and beyond that all "parents" have been very sick and died very early. My fiance's family has their own list of problems on the other spectrum of physiology which don't match with my side. If we had kids, they have a huge chance to be sick for their life.

Would I act (or not act on it)...not sure, I am not at that stage where having a kid is feasible. But it will definitely be something I consider.

But there are other considerations for me too. World population, the existing "global warming" etc. There are others but don't feel like discussing politics.

I'd do it just to piss people off.

I think Harvey Danger said it best.
"Been around the world and found that only
stupid people are breeding
the creatins cloning and feeding
and I don't even own a tv"

Harvey Birdman said it better...

"I'll take the case!"

unrelated. but still.


I only plan to breed if I can be certain my spawn will be a world leader. As of now, this seems unlikely. Possibly an upper level minion, but leader... that's just pushing it.

Classic1 didnt! Hell, he had a kid AFTER he realised he had a receding hair line. That is just pain wrong!!!:p

i had all intention on ending my genetic legacy for various reasons, one of several being i carry several undesirable traits. poor vision strong chance of psychosis , markers for diabetes and sickle cell. among a long list of other things.

i was on the road to getting a vasectomy, but she got pregnant on purpose, and had to stay off her bipolar meds to keep it, so that poor child is ****ed either way it goes

The diabetes thing is what always gets me when considering reproduction, aside from various other things related to the post coitus. My father died a rather painful death from diabetes related complications, I've been lucky so far in my life to not have diabetes though I get tested fairly regularly. I'm just not sure if it's worth passing on such a terrible potential to an offspring that I personally have a hard time justifying. In my family the "every other generation" thing has held true for some time, with me being among the fortunate few. Aside from passing on the family name/legacy, I feel little need to have children that might be subjected to the same fate as my father, aunt, and grandfather. Adding problems of my own to that which may be part environment or part heredity (bonus points to whoever picks up where that quote is from) just makes it seem irrational. At the same time, I love the little buggers and really do enjoy watching them develop. Teaching swimming lessons for a couple years was one of the most satisfying experiences of my life.

Type 1 or 2?

type 1. My father was diagnosed when he was 13. I seem to have well escaped that range but It's still something that runs through my mind with a great frequency. It's not a glamorous way to die. The circumstances surrounding it are even less so.

Raising a child is the most fulfilling and joyful thing I have ever done. By far, the best thing so far I have done for the planet. She is a better person than I will ever hope to be. I feel sorry for the self absorbed folks who look for excuses to not have them. They do not know what they are missing.

^+1 I can't wait to have kids.

It doesn't seem to stop the idiocrats.

I feel sorry for the self absorbed folks who look for excuses to not have them. They do not know what they are missing.

I've often wondered where this "self absorbed" stereotype directed at people who choose not to have children actually comes from. Does anyone really think for one second, after considering the number of children in the world who don't have food, clothing or shelter, that actually bringing one more mouth to feed into the world is some kind of philanthropic sacrifice? It seems to me that if a person was serious about trying to look at "the bigger picture" here, they'd be more likely to look around at some of the other kids that don't have a lot in life, and trying to improve their lot. I guess most folks would rather just "have one of their own" than help someone else.

It's not that much different from spending money on acquiring other possessions for "their own" instead of having children when you think about it.

Indeed. Much or my present position as a non-breaderhas resulted from a lack of understanding of what my procreating will bring to this world. Granted, I'm rater young.

bad vision, digestive tract issues, allergies, bad joints...everything I have...and I still would have a child.

I just hope that child won't repeat the mistakes I've done to give me the joints of a 60 year old man at age 28, as well as learns from my mistakes and doesn't repeat them.

A strong enough mind can get around most physical issues, and after a while you really don't even care about the issue anymore...so no biggie.

I've often wondered where this "self absorbed" stereotype directed at people who choose not to have children actually comes from. Does anyone really think for one second, after considering the number of children in the world who don't have food, clothing or shelter, that actually bringing one more mouth to feed into the world is some kind of philanthropic sacrifice? It seems to me that if a person was serious about trying to look at "the bigger picture" here, they'd be more likely to look around at some of the other kids that don't have a lot in life, and trying to improve their lot. I guess most folks would rather just "have one of their own" than help someone else.

It's not that much different from spending money on acquiring other possessions for "their own" instead of having children when you think about it.In this thread alone, there are those folks who would rather own cars or bikes than raise children. That might be a place to start looking for self absorbtion.

As to your concern regarding "bringing one more mouth to feed" into the World, my wife and I had similar concerns. Hence our decision to have only one child. One replacing two seemed a good compromise at the time. And as it turned out, I am sure she will do a more responsible job of living than I did. So I feel it was an overall plus for the World, not a negative.

I am child free NOT child-less. Biology and gene structure aside, the world is polluted and overpopulated enough. Single, with all my money being left to animals and environmental causes.
:)

Raising a child is the most fulfilling and joyful thing I have ever done. By far, the best thing so far I have done for the planet. She is a better person than I will ever hope to be. I feel sorry for the self absorbed folks who look for excuses to not have them. They do not know what they are missing.

You are in a whirlwind of self absorbtion yourself. What makes you think you are so great of a human being with greatness and self absorbed vision?
Planet? you have put more pollution, waste, global warming, animal testing rights, etc. by having your precious little child than if you did'nt.

Now, who is self-absorbed?

When I hear someone has a kid I know, I send a sympathy card and give more money to the "Save the baby Polar Bear Foundation"

Now, who is self-absorbed?
Obviously, according to you, I am. I can live with that.

I am child free NOT child-less. Biology and gene structure aside, the world is polluted and overpopulated enough. Single, with all my money being left to animals and environmental causes.
:)Did you acquire all those bikes before or after your "great awakening" and conversion to animals and enviromental causes? Do any of your bikes have leather saddles? As a design engineer, does anything you design not have a detrimental effect on the enviroment?

Take your holier than thou attitude and shove it.

Obviously, according to you, I am. I can live with that.

Most of us do.:)

Classic1 didnt! Hell, he had a kid AFTER he realised he had a receding hair line. That is just pain wrong!!!:p


No its not. He can grow his nose hairs and eyebrows and comb them back like I do.

Besides, he was fortunate enough to inherit his dads huge tackle, so it he can take the good with the bad as far as Im concerned.

No its not. He can grow his nose hairs and eyebrows and comb them back like I do.

Besides, he was fortunate enough to inherit his dads huge tackle, so it he can take the good with the bad as far as Im concerned.

He's outgrown you in that department already? Geezzzzzz he's only 5 isnt he???

For Christ's sake don't send the kid to high school with a nasal 'hair flare' :eek::p

I found out last year that I officially carry the fragile X gene --- have 92 out of 200 alleles - which means I carry only - and could pass them on. If I had 200 I would be autistic. 50 or below - no symptoms, no passing on. I have no symptoms at all, just a carrier of a pre-mutation gene.

Entered a study, Emery Institute (headed by scientist who discovered the gene), after a third cousin's child was diagnosed autistic - and it was caused by the gene fragile X. Of course each side of the family blamed the other side - as this relative was odd, this relative had this wrong with him. So I made the jump and now it's out in the open - it came down thru my mother/her sister's side. So now I'm one of their case history studies. Had a scientist travel from GA to here a few months ago to send me thru a battery of tests (as well as a couple other people involved in their case studies who happen to live within a couple of cities from here). Oh yeah and blood (I am NOT a good needle person at all). And all for a good cause.

Now knowing what I know now - and even though it looks like children, etc from my Mom look unaffected, yet all three of my Aunt's children have autism - ranging from one child being fairly verbal and seemingly normal to one 8 yr old boy who sits in the corner, bites other children and is under constant care - and will be the rest of his (their) lives ...

Unfortunately the decision was taken out of my hands a while ago (side affect of being a carrier of that stupid little gene) but even if I could - I would still seriously think my decision to go for it.

He's outgrown you in that department already? Geezzzzzz he's only 5 isnt he???

For Christ's sake don't send the kid to high school with a nasal 'hair flare' :eek::p

I never noticed I was going thin on top until I was 27-28. How old are you now, 26 isn't it? :p

yes. no way am I having kids.

I have type 1

eh, it is in perfect control (and allows me to legally dope thank you)

No way could I live with myself if I procreated and my kid
ended up with blood glucose or other hormonal issues because I was so selfish knowing
I was defective and procreated anyway.

Did you acquire all those bikes before or after your "great awakening" and conversion to animals and enviromental causes? Do any of your bikes have leather saddles? As a design engineer, does anything you design not have a detrimental effect on the enviroment?

Take your holier than thou attitude and shove it.

Wow. Do you do anything outside of having your child that causes you enjoyment? I would have to assume that, being on bikeforums.net, you own a bike, no? How is that any different from someone who doesn't have a child and chooses to enjoy his/her life as is?

As far as the "holier than thou" comment, take a look at your first post in this thread and point that finger back at yourself. ("Holier than thou" for condescending someone who has made a choice different from yours.)


I feel sorry for the self absorbed folks who look for excuses to not have them.

You mean like if I got them from the thrift store because I couldn't afford the new Levi's? I suppose the ability to provide pants for my eventual children isn't one of the top deciding factors for me.

I never noticed I was going thin on top until I was 27-28. How old are you now, 26 isn't it? :p

27 and I am a complete GOD on a bike. :)

And I am going grey (gracefully) not bald!!! :p

I decided against kids a long time ago. Not because of self-absorption but just because I basically realized that, normal genes or no, I don't have much of a nurturing one. And at this point, it's late for me to start thinking in those terms, so the decision is made.

The only thing I will say in this thread is that some of the most rewarding life experiences I have had have been with people whom others would look down on or consider as less acceptable. I had a cousin with down's syndrome which now days can be genetically tested for to see if the fetus may have this condition. He was the nicest person I have ever met, and always went way out of his way to try to entertain us when we visitied he and his parents. I miss him.
There are other simialr experiences, of which I could write on and on about.
So, I would never consider not procreating due to possible gene deficiencies.

Raising a child is the most fulfilling and joyful thing I have ever done. By far, the best thing so far I have done for the planet. She is a better person than I will ever hope to be. I feel sorry for the self absorbed folks who look for excuses to not have them. They do not know what they are missing.

+43

Anyway, i don't understand the questions. This commercial proves that bad jeans doesn't stop procreation. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wisUG4uyuuI

I have good genes and I still don't want kids. If I had some sort of congenital disorder, that would only add fuel to the fire.

Jynx - all kidding aside - my husband developed a neurodegenerative disorder in his early 50's that has left him completely dependent for the past 8 years. His father had it too. Our 25 yr. old biological daughter is certain that she will get it and the fear of that is horrible. No DNA test available. If I had known then what I know now....???? I don't know if we would have had a bio kid - note that our 2nd child is adopted. No easy answers