I'm fairly certain there is nothing to worry about
A Deathwatch Guard Send a noteboard - 11/09/2011 02:28:33 AM
First of all, there are the odds of the children ever meeting each other. They're not very high. The odds of them forming a relationship and having kids are even lower. And with only one parent in common, I am pretty certain the genetic effects would be miniscule.
Finally, limiting the number of children a single sperm donor can provide is sensible. Making some kind of organization to keep track of those children to make sure no accident incest occurs is not.
Finally, limiting the number of children a single sperm donor can provide is sensible. Making some kind of organization to keep track of those children to make sure no accident incest occurs is not.
One Sperm Donor, 150 sons and daughters
- 09/09/2011 09:13:14 PM
1052 Views
Back in the 80's we used to call it "Being a Rock Star". *NM*
- 10/09/2011 12:27:35 AM
213 Views
"We?" *NM*
- 10/09/2011 01:36:16 AM
308 Views
It's this cool new term I just came up with. It means "myself and other people."
- 10/09/2011 01:50:26 AM
524 Views
Yet, if they didn't know they were siblings then they wouldn't be bound by the incest taboo.
- 10/09/2011 03:16:45 AM
527 Views
Yes, but the taboo has a rationale behind it.
- 10/09/2011 08:13:01 AM
730 Views
Are people with actually diagnosed genetic defects "allowed" to have children? *NM*
- 10/09/2011 12:41:56 PM
269 Views
yeah they are allowed
- 10/09/2011 10:22:24 PM
613 Views
Of course they are allowed, but why?
- 11/09/2011 01:38:57 AM
651 Views
I see where you are going with this, but
- 11/09/2011 08:07:45 PM
594 Views
I was just making the point that the incest taboo is a societal construct. Thus...
- 12/09/2011 05:37:26 AM
564 Views
I'm fairly certain there is nothing to worry about
- 11/09/2011 02:28:33 AM
465 Views