Week 5 Post 3-Sperm Donation

   The overlying theme of this week was not as interesting to me as previous weeks because I am not particularly interested in the science behind how sperm donation works, as I am for cases of genetic screening and IVF. However I did find the underlying implications of the cases and arguments, which establishes certain traditional beliefs about what makes the best family dynamic. I do not necessarily agree that having two parents, one father and one mother is the best way to raise a child, or will always produce a better outcome for the child. In one of the cases I did not write about the state was trying to force paternity on a donor because the mother of the child needed welfare and they wanted the donor to sublimit her income so they would not have to pay to support her, and that shocked me. It reminded me how the government is not always operating in the best interests of its citizens but in its own best interest. 

     One question I have is how much relevance should genetic relation have in determining paternity? For example, if another person raises and finically supports a child for the majority of their life, should they have less of a claim to paternity than someone who did not support the child but is the genetic father? How does this change if the child was born through sperm donation or actual intercourse?