TX, Bedford-Mother unfreezes son's sperm

http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/A-mom-chances-life-after-sons-death

"I know there's going to be haters out there who don't believe in what I'm doing, but they also probably have never been in my shoes," said Marissa.

She admits her reasons for going through with the controversial process have changed. Right after Nikolas died, she wanted to replace her son to feel better, but now she believes she is doing it for him."


I'm not sure How I feel about this as a whole. But I am concerned about the secrecy surrounding the out of country surrogacy. In other countries some young women are trafficked to be surrogates and used as baby factories for people in the us and other developed nations.


"Marissa made a deal with a surrogacy clinic in another country not to ever reveal where they are located. "

That's just creepy, what a twisted legacy. mo

I read the comments following the link to this thread in the original article. As would be expected some are from a very limited view point and some are not.

What I find interesting is that going all the way back to the ancient societies there were always ground rules in place to preserve a families lineage.

Two examples sums up pretty much every cultures creed, the Chinese (worlds largest society) and the Jews (Basis of the Judeo/Christian Western world we get our societal structure from in America)

Both of these widely different cultures as well as other ancients of other continents (South America, Africa, Aboriginal Australia) had many systems in place to insure the lineage of a man. Brother in law marriage, penalites for expelling semen on the ground, concubines & polygamy to name a few.

American Indian tribes raided villages to procure wives, Vikings practiced "war rape" ( ethnic cleansing as it is known today) and they are just a few examples.

What this woman in the above link is trying to do essentially, is to preserve her sons lineage. We live in a world with far to many people and that allows us the luxury of debating who should get the privilege of life and who should not. That intellectual debate does not address the basic primal drive of a family wanting to "further its own" which is in itself a legitimate human need.

It amazes me that in a country with a high rate of child abuse and legitimatized abortion, anyone would judge this woman. I would expect that along with all the abuse and legitimacy would come a certain refrain of judgement for this woman. A whatever works for you attitude. The same attitude used to allow the above two realities to exist should apply to this woman.

But I see that is not the case.

I wonder who the wealthy 'friend' is who's paying 75% of the cost? I also wonder about the surrogacy clinic deal. Why the secrecy?

Who is going to raise this child? The grandmother? I don't get it. Why bring a child intentionally into this world to not only be raised without a father but to carry such a burden of being a "legacy"? And grandma can't be that young? Who will raise the child if something happens to her? This just reeks of selfishness. If she feels such a void why not adopt one of the many children in our country that will probably stay in foster care without their own family? Now that is a legacy.

DairyGirl said:

Who is going to raise this child? The grandmother? I don't get it. Why bring a child intentionally into this world to not only be raised without a father but to carry such a burden of being a "legacy"? And grandma can't be that young? Who will raise the child if something happens to her? This just reeks of selfishness. If she feels such a void why not adopt one of the many children in our country that will probably stay in foster care without their own family? Now that is a legacy.

Click to expand...

Since you are using the word legacy I am going to assume that you read my post above.

I think you raise legitimate concerns in your post

DairyGirl said:

Who is going to raise this child? The grandmother? I don't get it. Why bring a child intentionally into this world to not only be raised without a father

Click to expand...

I am making a Huge assumption here that it will be the grandmother. I read somewhere that she is in her 40's. Still a childbearing age.

SO to address your question above...

if a young woman became pregnant by her fiance who was a soldier and who got shipped off to war only to die immediately after the young woman foiund out she was pregnant, should she abort the child because there is no father?

I just read an article where a mom carried her twin grandchildren for her daughter who could not carry her own pregnancy.

It was a very feel good article.

What if that woman's daughter had been her son instead?

Would that make it too freaky?

What if there was no "mom" needing "help" but a son needing his mothers help?

Would that be ok?

When your grown child dies "without issue" (legal term) and you have the sole legal right to his body, where do your rights lie exactly?

Glow said:

Since you are using the word legacy I am going to assume that you read my post above.

I think you raise legitimate concerns in your post




I am making a Huge assumption here that it will be the grandmother. I read somewhere that she is in her 40's. Still a childbearing age.

SO to address your question above...

if a young woman became pregnant by her fiance who was a soldier and who got shipped off to war only to die immediately after the young woman foiund out she was pregnant, should she abort the child because there is no father?

Click to expand...

BBM. Well the bolded part sounds good, sounds sweet and sentimental. However, this older woman had sperm milked from the body of her dead son, got an egg donor to her specs, and then got someone else to carry the child.

There is something not quite "above board" here, at least in my opinion; it smacks too much of secret societies and bloodlines.

Glow said:

I just read an article where a mom carried her twin grandchildren for her daughter who could not carry her own pregnancy.

It was a very feel good article.

What if that woman's daughter had been her son instead?

Would that make it too freaky?

What if there was no "mom" needing "help" but a son needing his mothers help?

Would that be ok?

When your grown child dies "without issue" (legal term) and you have the sole legal right to his body, where do your rights lie exactly?

Click to expand...

IF one of my daughters could not have carried their own babies, I might have done that for them, but only for THEM, not MYSELF. But, my daughter's were alive, and could tend, enjoy the fruit of their bodies.

In this case, from what I've read, grandma isn't going to do that. What IS the reason this woman wants her dead son's "legacy/genes/DNA" propagated? Red flags going up for me on this one.

Just re-read and the title says "unfreezes". WHY was his sperm frozen in the first place? Was he "special"? That brings up a few horrors in itself. There had to be a reason his sperm was frozen what was it?

My opinion only

Trident I THINK he was an only child. It took a court hearing before a judge for her to be able to do this though there was people fighting I cannot remember who though I'm surprised it was allowed... VERY

Like i said my concern lies with the secret surrogacy... Something is NOT right with that.. and I worry it's what i stated before.. young women in 3rd world countries turned into baby factories.. and that is just disgusting....

peeples said:

Trident I THINK he was an only child. It took a court hearing before a judge for her to be able to do this though there was people fighting I cannot remember who though I'm surprised it was allowed... VERY

Like i said my concern lies with the secret surrogacy... Something is NOT right with that.. and I worry it's what i stated before.. young women in 3rd world countries turned into baby factories.. and that is just disgusting....

Click to expand...

I can understand your concern about young women in third-world countries becoming baby factories, and I agree with you - a new wrinkle on the horrors of today's technology.

I am, however, wondering why this mother had her son's sperm frozen in the first place.

Plus, imo she stole that sperm. He did not give his permission! It was taken after death. I would haunt her. jmo

Trident said:

BBM. Well the bolded part sounds good, sounds sweet and sentimental. However, this older woman had sperm milked from the body of her dead son, got an egg donor to her specs, and then got someone else to carry the child.

There is something not quite "above board" here, at least in my opinion; it smacks too much of secret societies and bloodlines.

Click to expand...

Hi Trident,

What does BBM mean? :blushing: I want to make sure that I fully understand your entire post!

I'm not Trident, but it means "bolded my me" or "bold by me."

I know every parent thinks their child is special but IMO this woman thinks her child was extra-special ... wonder why? Does she have delusions of grandeur about her deceased son? She has another son ... can't she rely on him to pass on those super-sonic genes?

Evans, who has one other son, age 22, told the Austin American-Statesman newspaper that Nikolas wanted to have three sons someday and had even picked out their names: Hunter, Tod and Van.

Really? I mean, really? A 21 year-old guy who has three names picked out for the three sons he thinks he might have someday? Or are those three names that his g/f circled in a baby name book while forcing him to listen to the choices?

And where is Nikolas' father in all of this? Will he be there to help grandparent this unborn child too?

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/30133582/ns/today-today_health/

(this is an old article from 2009)

found this, that addresses one of my questions above:

For Evans, the idea came as the family was preparing for her son's inevitable death. She discussed the idea with her longtime boyfriend, her ex-husband, her older son and other family members, who offered to be part of the child's life.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Wellne...randchild-post-mortem/story?id=9913939&page=2

according to her blog, a friend of hers agreed to be a surrogate ... wonder why she didn't go that route?

http://www.nikolasevans.com/index.php/2010/05/

BuzzieCat said:

I'm not Trident, but it means "bolded my me" or "bold by me."

Click to expand...

Oh, ok! Thanks BuzzieCat. I am not much of a poster or texter so I am not allways sure of the lingo :crazy:

Just reading around a bit on her blog (Thanks for the link LadyL) she says that she was concerned about the effect it would have on their future relationships if she used the friends that volunteered.

That sounds legitimate.. People can get pretty emotional about things even when they start out with the best of intentions. This is already a highly charged situation emotionally speaking. This mom gave away her sons organs in organ donation and met at least one of the recipients. She has been lobbying for judicial changes in her state. She has given a victims statement and faced a disappointing sentencing of her sons murderer


She also comments on the intrusive negativity of the press as well as others on her decision to try to retrieve the sperrn after her sons demise.


She has had to process a lot in a short amount of time.

I think it's incredibly sad and misguided, a mother that refuses to let go and technology aided her denial of the loss of her only son.