Gay Parents | News

Watch: Gary and Tony Have a Baby

Gary_tony  

Tonight, at 8 pm EDT, CNN is running Gary and Tony Have a Baby on Soledad O'Brien's In America. The special chronicles Gary Spino and Tony Brown's journey to form a family through surrogacy.

Watch a clip, AFTER THE JUMP...

One more:


Stranger Helps Gay Couple Make a Family - For more amazing video clips, click here

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. I'm so glad this happened for them, after 20 years together! And it's great that they're getting major media play. I hope this opens some people's eyes to the fact that gay people make great parents.

    Posted by: Steve | Jun 24, 2010 11:24:56 AM


  2. While this video is quite sweet, I've never understood this obsession with biological children. A fraction of that money could be spent by simply saving a child who is already in a horrible situation... the world is full of children who need families.

    Posted by: anonymous | Jun 24, 2010 12:02:40 PM


  3. Well, as a certain politician said, everybody wants a pet. Of course, even that offers plenty of opportunities to adopt rom shelters. It's the old Veblen thing, showing off through huge expenditures--conspicuous consumption. I'm more interested in the Black couple with multiple adoptees.

    Posted by: gregorybrown | Jun 24, 2010 1:01:45 PM


  4. I agree, anonymous. Your genes aren't that different from anyone else's. And most people who have bio kids don't possess genes worth passing on (yes, eugenics blah blah blah). It seems worse, in light of the sum total of potential and actual suffering experienced by throwaway children, to introduce more resource users while ignoring that option. That's a problem that will only get worse with time.

    Posted by: TANK | Jun 24, 2010 1:08:22 PM


  5. And while I will defend the right of gays and lesbians to adopt and have kids as a matter of reason and ethics (as the only opposition is naked homophobia/bigotry), I've always considered myself lucky to be gay in the sense that I never have to justify not having nor wanting children...it's not even on the radar, and not an issue.

    Posted by: TANK | Jun 24, 2010 1:11:33 PM


  6. Yes, why don't more gays adopt now that science is finally catching up and letting them have bio kids? Straight people could avail themselves of adoption for CENTURIES but no one bats an eye when breeders pop out their own kids.

    Good for these guys, and good for all the gays who have the luxury of establishing a genetic connection to their kids!

    FYI, adoption ain't easy and/or cheap either.

    Posted by: fred | Jun 24, 2010 1:34:57 PM


  7. Oh, I think it's pretty unjustifiable when straight people do it, too. There's no such thing a difference between commission and omission in ethical life.

    Posted by: TANK | Jun 24, 2010 1:45:47 PM


  8. Good for them but I would never want a child. I'd never want to put a child through this misery which is life. (sarcasm intended)

    Posted by: Matt | Jun 24, 2010 1:46:53 PM


  9. I'm glad O'Brien described it as "for them, family means...". I agree, that surrogacy is a whole lot of trouble and money when there are so many children looking for forever parents. That said, I also understand the desire to pass on one's family genes. After some consideration, we chose adoption.

    Some states make adoption by gay parents very difficult, and in FL, impossible.

    That said, Foster-to-Adopt is pretty straightforward in most states and the cheapest option, which leaves more money for college and supporting other kids in need.

    A great organization is Families Like Ours, which has a focus on placing LGBT youth: http://www.familieslikeours.org/

    Posted by: David R. | Jun 24, 2010 1:47:49 PM


  10. Why do gay men continue to evaluate the choices and actions of other gay men? Through their love and a desire to bring up a child, let these two men raise a kid in a loving home and thus create an ally for our community. Instead of raising a judgmental, fear-filled, closed-minded hater like a lot of homophobes and a like lot of the people posting here.

    Posted by: Rob V | Jun 24, 2010 2:53:03 PM


  11. I agree with the commenters who advocated for adoption. I have 4 adopted siblings - I am the only biological child in my family. I think it is a sin to spend this sort of time, money, resources, energy, etc. just so you can have a child that shares your genes. There are so, so many children in the world who need loving parents - why bring a new kid into the world? And often those who complain about the cost and lengthiness of the adoption process are only considering non-disabled, caucasian infants.

    Posted by: PG | Jun 24, 2010 4:24:53 PM


  12. "Why do gay men continue to evaluate the choices and actions of other gay men?"

    This was stupid it hurt to read... So does that mean that I can't evaluate the choices of other gay men because I'm gay, and vice versa? Why...because of teh gay....if I ponder this anymore I'm gonna have a stroke...

    Posted by: TANK | Jun 24, 2010 4:33:26 PM


  13. Together my partner and I have been through Gestational Surrogacy (with donor eggs and a surrogate), Traditional Surrogacy (where the surrogate used her own eggs), and are now starting the adoption process (still with no child). NONE of these options are inexpensive. You're realistically looking at 40K+ to do any of them.

    As for David R's comment about Foster to Adopt being an 'easier' option, I couldn't disagree more. There is nothing easy about taking a child into your home and loving them, only to see them given back to their parent/s who often abused the child and caused them to be taken away in the first place. Just because there are less cost implications doesn't mean there aren't significant emotional costs.

    Long story short. It's really difficult to make a family in any non-traditional way.

    Posted by: James | Jun 24, 2010 9:47:23 PM


  14. "Together my partner and I have been through Gestational Surrogacy (with donor eggs and a surrogate), Traditional Surrogacy (where the surrogate used her own eggs), and are now starting the adoption process (still with no child). NONE of these options are inexpensive. You're realistically looking at 40K+ to do any of them."

    Wow, that sounds really disgusting and expensive.

    Posted by: TANK | Jun 24, 2010 9:54:45 PM


  15. This show was very well-done and moving. It really looked at all angles, at how everyone involved, directly and indirectly, was affected by their decision to have a baby. Lots of small-minded, small-town bigotry surrounded those involved. Yet, they succeeded! Good for them.

    ^^X^^

    Posted by: Bruce Wayne | Jun 25, 2010 3:02:10 AM


  16. when you have ego involved -- when people feel they MUST replicate themselves because they are so wonderful -- the option of adoption is never really considered. too bad for the kids who need homes so badly, and too bad for the thousands of charities that could certainly do good instead with the insane money people throw into this process.

    Posted by: yup | Jun 25, 2010 11:21:19 AM


  17. I disagree that surrogacy necessarily involves the desire to "replicate themselves because they are so wonderful". Wanting to have biological children shouldn't be demonized... it seems clear that it's a pretty normal desire that is no better or worse than the desire to adopt.

    Some gay men I know speak of how when they were younger (perhaps before coming to terms with their sexuality), they desired to have kids. When they grew up to be gay adults they had to work to reconcile these goals with their sexuality, and for some, surrogacy allowed a process of child-bearing that was closer to the one they had envisioned they would experience.

    Just like having children in general, the surrogacy/adoption question is a personal consideration that each couple must explore for themselves. There is no right answer, and there certainly isn't a "more ethical" answer.

    Posted by: Bryan | Jun 25, 2010 12:19:54 PM


  18. "it seems clear that it's a pretty normal desire that is no better or worse than the desire to adopt."

    First, no one's demonizing people who want their own kids. Second, that's your argument? It's normal, and because it's normal, it's no better or worse than a desire to adopt? War's normal, too...so is eating meat, polluting, and being religious...bad, bad argument!

    "Some gay men I know speak of how when they were younger (perhaps before coming to terms with their sexuality), they desired to have kids. When they grew up to be gay adults they had to work to reconcile these goals with their sexuality, and for some, surrogacy allowed a process of child-bearing that was closer to the one they had envisioned they would experience."

    Some people really enjoy polluting...it's easier than being responsible and recyling, and on an industrial level, it's a lot less expensive than disposing of contiminates in an environmentally sound manner. It's their desire... Further, this concerns everyone who has children, gay or straight. It's just as unjustifiable for a straight couple to introduce another resource consumer in light of the many who already exist as it is for a gay couple.

    And there is no right answer? That's the laziest, most thoughtless thing one can say...it's almost as if you resent having the ability to reason. Of course there's a right answer. It's called ethical reasoning, and you should try it sometime.

    Posted by: TANK | Jun 25, 2010 2:53:48 PM


  19. Oh, and saying that there is no right answer is saying that any answer is the right answer, and is the answer you think is the right answer (which is self contradictory)...which is so facile and backward it's not even worth talking about.

    Posted by: TANK | Jun 25, 2010 2:56:27 PM


  20. Okay, I think it's wonderful that gay men and women who have the money to do so are expanding their families beyond their dogs and cats. But I have a question:

    Are there ANY gay men left out there that truly DON'T wanna have kids, or am I a dying breed?

    Posted by: Stephen | Jun 25, 2010 5:38:40 PM


  21. It's too bad these forums never seem to allow for much reasoned, polite discussion.

    Posted by: Bryan | Jun 26, 2010 1:03:34 AM


  22. You're not gonna much more reasoned response than the one I just gave ya on any forum. Unless, of course, you're just looking for an echo.

    Posted by: TANK | Jun 26, 2010 1:11:06 AM


  23. I watched about fifteen minutes of this program and had to change the channel. I couldn't imagine when these guys would have time to parent - they struck me as the type of people who spend hours every day jerking off to their images in a mirror. I found it nauseating. There are already too many people on this planet and with millions of children needing homes why spend thousands reproducing your special little self indulgent gene pool?

    Posted by: hamp | Jun 28, 2010 9:45:39 AM


  24. The eugenic attitude of all of you is so unbelievably disgusting. Referring to babies as "resource consumers". How far are your heads up Al Gore's @$$ that you no longer see life for what it truly is? I hope that most of you are straight because if not this would greatly deplete any humanism that the gay community may or may not have accumulated up to this point. Sickening.

    Posted by: Jeff | Jun 29, 2010 1:38:20 AM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Watch: Profile on 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Photographer Jeff Sheng« «