Jim wrote:

> Kevin Wayne Williams wrote:
> 
>> Jim wrote:
>>
>>> Kevin Wayne Williams wrote:
>>>
>>>> John W. wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Murgi" <srindler@da2.so-net.ne.jp> wrote in message 
>>>>> news:<add80b4ec86cbee6124feed797c03804@news.secureusenet.com>...
>>>>>
>>>>>> "John W." <worthj1970@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:409599B5.1070303@yahoo.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Anyone know a good place to buy shoes online for kids? Got a special
>>>>>>> request from the sperm child...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What's a "sperm child"? Still frozen in liquid nitrogen without 
>>>>>> feet to need
>>>>>> shoes?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That's a child of my sperm, as opposed to one of someone else's sperm.
>>>>> And I'm really just assuming that fact.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That you would write that in a public forum sends little chills up 
>>>> my spine.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well, if he hasn't done a dna test... there's no way to
>>> be sure, is there?  I've read that upwards of 30% of children born
>>> in two-parent households are not the product of the husband.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>> You are twisting the percentages a bit. Blood-typing anomalies show 
>> that about 10% of children don't belong to the putative father. That 
>> means that about 19% of two-child families have a cuckoo, and 27% of 
>> three-child families have one. Add in the cases where the father is 
>> aware of the situation, and you can easily hit 30% of households for 
>> the two and three kid cases. 30% of households is a lot different then 
>> 30% of the kids.
>>
>> My point was that a father either thinks of his kid as his, or not. 
>> Allowing yourself to live in a gray zone risks causing a lot of damage 
>> to the kid.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, it would (be a problem) if you think being a "father" can only be 
> with your
> biological children.  If John can be a "father" to any child in his
> family, whether or not he knows he/she to be his own "sperm child", what's
> the problem?  I'm guessing you wouldn't be a very good candidate for
> adopting kids, eh?

Missed my point. Either he decides he's going to be a father (at which 
time terms like "sperm child" become irrelevant, and make a distinction 
that can only hurt the non-sperm children), or he's not (at which time, 
"sperm child" is only relevant for support demands).

KWW