(Homosexuality) can I apply for artificial insemination programs?

[amnesyuck]

If so, where and how?

I'd also like to know more about a new method that allows 50% of my DNA and 50% of my partner's DNA to be in the same child - if there's such a thing.

 

Thanks! <3

[StringJunky]

 

I'd also like to know more about a new method that allows 50% of my DNA and 50% of my partner's DNA to be in the same child - if there's such a thing.

 

Thanks! <3

Egg meets sperm; that's what happens without any intervention. You each contribute half of the genes.

 

Edit: Sorry, wrong answer. I understand now

Edited September 2, 2016 by StringJunky

[Endy0816]

I would say eventually, but still many years out for humans.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_egg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_sperm

 

This article talks about relatively recent advances as well:

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/new-research-suggests-female-sperm-and-male-eggs-possible-8780153.html

[Function]

It would be interesting indeed to make 2 sperm/egg cell nuclei fuse and form a new nucleus and to have it undergo some mitotic divisions, followed by the eventual meiotic divisions, and have natural course and coincidence decide about the portion of each individual's chromatine included in the new sperm/egg cells ... 50% would be very hard, if not impossible to acchieve, but imo, you don't need 50% to be satisfied.

 

Sometimes, in these cases particularly, I think I'd appreciate and embrace ignorance on how much of each individual is included in the new 'product'.

 

If still, you'd want 50%, you'd have to individually pick the genes of yourself you want to 'include' in the future child, and those of your partner, making sure they each add up for an equal total amount of nucleotides etc., which seems overly complicated to acchieve satisfaction.

Not to mention the genome of the female donating an egg cell for insemination and undergoing the pregnancy.

Edited September 3, 2016 by Function

[DrmDoc]

If so, where and how?

I'd also like to know more about a new method that allows 50% of my DNA and 50% of my partner's DNA to be in the same child - if there's such a thing.

 

Thanks! <3

 

Perhaps the best way to assure your offspring will share at least some of your partner's DNA is to ask if one of his closest female relatives would be willing to contribute an egg to be fertilized by you for artificial insemination. I think that is the least expensive, practically available method you could pursue. I hope this helps.

Edited September 3, 2016 by DrmDoc

[John Cuthber]

It's a nice, traditional, romantic idea to have a child with the DNA from both parents.

However, realistically, it's going to have two people's DNA.

And since most people's DNA is practically identical* there won't be much difference whether the second contribution is from one of the couple or from someone else entirely.

*(I'm told I share something like 99 % of my DNA with a chimpanzee, so I must share much more than that with any human)

[DrmDoc]

It's a nice, traditional, romantic idea to have a child with the DNA from both parents.

However, realistically, it's going to have two people's DNA.

And since most people's DNA is practically identical* there won't be much difference whether the second contribution is from one of the couple or from someone else entirely.

 

*(I'm told I share something like 99 % of my DNA with a chimpanzee, so I must share much more than that with any human)

Perhaps I misunderstand, is this an inference that the DNA tests we use in criminal cases and to identify deceased, distant and close relatives are virtually useless since, essentially, "most people's DNA is practically identical"? To some of us, even the combined cosmetic distinctions DNA comingling produces is an important reflection of the bonds we desire and share.

 

Regarding the DNA difference between humans and chimps, I was reminded of this Neil deGrasse Tyson discussion where he made a very compelling argument on the significance of that 1%.

[John Cuthber]

Perhaps I misunderstand, is this an inference that the DNA tests we use in criminal cases and to identify deceased, distant and close relatives are virtually useless since, essentially, "most people's DNA is practically identical"? To some of us, even the combined cosmetic distinctions DNA comingling produces is an important reflection of the bonds we desire and share.

 

Regarding the DNA difference between humans and chimps, I was reminded of this Neil deGrasse Tyson discussion where he made a very compelling argument on the significance of that 1%.

We are, in general, the genetic result of a race between millions of sperm.

We are already pretty nearly a random choice. So, as I said, it's a nice idea: but it's not a requirement that our children are genetically related to us and our partners. plenty of people adopt.

[DrmDoc]

We are, in general, the genetic result of a race between millions of sperm.

We are already pretty nearly a random choice. So, as I said, it's a nice idea: but it's not a requirement that our children are genetically related to us and our partners. plenty of people adopt.

I agree; it's not a requirement, it's a choice. Indeed, adoption is an excellent alternative given the number of exceptional children waiting and wanting parental devotion. Unfortunately, adoption isn't always an option for homosexuals in some places because of discriminatory rules. However, short of artificial insemination, the OP could investigate whether adoption is possible where he resides.

[Memammal]

We are, in general, the genetic result of a race between millions of sperm.

We are already pretty nearly a random choice.

Within comparatively narrow parameters though...comparatively narrow in the sense that each new born consists of a "random" mix of his/her ancestral genes...within the broad human genome. DrmDoc's original suggestion re a close (as possible) relative of one of the partners acting as a surrogate was possibly the best practice approach towards realising the OP's ambitions. You need a very understanding and open-minded surrogate though and it opens up the possibility of potential conflicts or interferences as the child grows up. I agree that adopting would therefore be a sensible alternative.