GetDotted Domains

Viewing Thread:
"Is it just me..."

The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.

Tue 10/04/07 at 22:42
Regular
"Monochromatic"
Posts: 18,487
or is the guy behind this a complete c**t!*
How bloody cruel can this guy be? He's basically ended her dreams and for what? She wasn't asking anything from him that he hadn't already given.
I swear to god if i met him in the street i'd kick him in the balls and end his chances of having kids.


*I'm sorry for the language but i feel it's apt
Wed 11/04/07 at 18:57
Regular
"Devil in disguise"
Posts: 3,151
I agree with FM too. I'll give him 100 points!

I think people just want to take the easy way out. Its far easier to just blame the man and question his character than accept that situations arise where theres no good answer.
Wed 11/04/07 at 18:50
Regular
Posts: 19,415
I totally agree with FantasyMeister. 10 points.
Wed 11/04/07 at 18:39
Regular
"Copyright: FM Inc."
Posts: 10,338
Nin wrote:
> Thats something entirely different and you're bringing a 3rd
> person into it which is not what she's asking for. She wants him
> to stick to what he has already agreed to.
> You cant switch this arguement around. It's two very different
> situations.

From what I can see the man is sticking to the agreement. That he'd fertilise her eggs in case they wanted to have a child later with the legal understanding that either he or she could pull out of it at any time up until implantation, which is what the current law allows.

Whilst I understand her being distressed at not being able to have a child of her own, I can understand his decision to pull out, and I can imagine his distress when all of a sudden he's getting dragged though the courts in an effort to make him the father of a child that he no longer wishes with someone whom he no longer wishes to have children with.

Nowadays this is pretty much a one-off case because eggs don't need to be fertilised to be stored, whereas back when this woman was having her treatment they did. Women can now store eggs in the knowledge that if they lose the ability to produce more they can get them fertilised later.

If she'd been born 50 years ago she'd probably have suffered a prolonged and painful death due to cervical cancer, should she have survived she'd have been resigned to the fact that she'd never be able to have her own kids, so she's somewhat lucky to be around.

As medicine continues to advance and the law evolves to deal with new situations these kinds of moral and ethical dilemmas will continue to crop up: euthanasia arguments are constantly being debated as more techniques to prolong life become more widespread, paternity and maternity issues are constantly being buffetted by changes in both medicine and law, there's continuing debate over at what point humans 'become' human when discussing genetic advances and so on.

So whilst I feel sorry for this woman because she can no longer bear her own children, I can also see his side of it. Sympathy should never be the reason to bring another life into the world, it's not exactly a sound foundation for a perfect upbringing, and how would you like to be the kid who finds out that they only exist because their mother dragged a reluctant father who didn't want them through a lengthy court battle?
Wed 11/04/07 at 18:28
Regular
"You've upset me"
Posts: 21,152
Nin wrote:
She wants him
> to stick to what he has already agreed to.

What he agreed to whilst in a relationship with her.
Wed 11/04/07 at 17:59
Regular
"Monochromatic"
Posts: 18,487
Alfonse wrote:
> I still think you went too far by wishing cancer upon this man.

Your opinion * shrugs shoulders *
I stick by everything i've said. I'd see it as justice to have his chance of having children taken away, even moreso if he's just destroyed what would have been his last chance.
Wed 11/04/07 at 17:55
Regular
Posts: 9,995
I still think you went too far by wishing cancer upon this man.
Wed 11/04/07 at 17:53
Regular
"Monochromatic"
Posts: 18,487
pb wrote:
> The two are seperate issues. Think about this as well; If we
> turned it around and the man wanted to use the embryo to
> impregnate his new wife/girlfriend because he couldn't have
> children any longer (I'm not thinking about whether this is
> actually possible, just for arguement's sake) would that be the
> same?

Thats something entirely different and you're bringing a 3rd person into it which is not what she's asking for. She wants him to stick to what he has already agreed to.
You cant switch this arguement around. It's two very different situations.
Wed 11/04/07 at 17:46
Regular
"AkaSeraphim"
Posts: 9,397
Its about not only having a child but also to carry a child, feeling it growing inside you. To feel each movement. To go through bringing a child in to the world. Not just getting one off the shelf ready made.
Wed 11/04/07 at 17:39
Regular
Posts: 9,995
Why is it a poor substitute?
Wed 11/04/07 at 17:37
Regular
"Monochromatic"
Posts: 18,487
Cycloon wrote:
> it doesn't preclude adoption or another
> man and IVF.

She's had cancer and is infertile. Another man or IVF aren't an option. That leaves her with adoption which is a really poor substitute.

Freeola & GetDotted are rated 5 Stars

Check out some of our customer reviews below:

Many thanks!
You were 100% right - great support!
Just a quick note to say thanks for a very good service ... in fact excellent service..
I am very happy with your customer service and speed and quality of my broadband connection .. keep up the good work . and a good new year to all of you at freeola.
Matthew Bradley

View More Reviews

Need some help? Give us a call on 01376 55 60 60

Go to Support Centre
Feedback Close Feedback

It appears you are using an old browser, as such, some parts of the Freeola and Getdotted site will not work as intended. Using the latest version of your browser, or another browser such as Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, or Opera will provide a better, safer browsing experience for you.