Sperm donor even though not necessary

[Fluidic Kimbo]

My uncle on my mother's side has two children, and both of them have the same condition. One of them has a mild case (with a score of about 4 out of 10), and the other has a severe case (10 out of 10). The first one will just about get through life. The second one won't ever be able to get a job and live a normal life.

My sister's first child was born with the same condition, with a severity of about 7 out of 10 -- he won't ever get a job and live a normal life.

So during the Summer I went to get myself assessed, and it turns out that I have the mildest of mildest of mildest cases (maybe something like 0.5 out of 10). I have a good job and I can take care of myself, so I'm not concerned.

But. . . this means that I have the genes. So this means that if I have children, they might have the condition, and there's no telling how severe it might be in them. They could be 0.5 out of 10 just like their dad, or they could be 10 out of 10.

Seeing how difficult a time my uncle has in caring for his children, I really don't ever want to be in that position, and so I really think it would be a bad move for me to just hope for the best.

I'm really thinking that the sensible thing to do, would be to have a vasectomy so that I can have unprotected sex with my future wife, and then if we ever want to have children, to opt for a sperm donor (some athlete with an IQ above 140).

Can I please get opinions on this?

[Gallowmere]

My uncle on my mother's side has two children, and both of them have the same condition. One of them has a mild case (with a score of about 4 out of 10), and the other has a severe case (10 out of 10). The first one will just about get through life. The second one won't ever be able to get a job and live a normal life.

My sister's first child was born with the same condition, with a severity of about 7 out of 10 -- he won't ever get a job and live a normal life.

So during the Summer I went to get myself assessed, and it turns out that I have the mildest of mildest of mildest cases (maybe something like 0.5 out of 10). I have a good job and I can take care of myself, so I'm not concerned.

But. . . this means that I have the genes. So this means that if I have children, they might have the condition, and there's no telling how severe it might be in them. They could be 0.5 out of 10 just like their dad, or they could be 10 out of 10.

Seeing how difficult a time my uncle has in caring for his children, I really don't ever want to be in that position, and so I really think it would be a bad move for me to just hope for the best.

I'm really thinking that the sensible thing to do, would be to have a vasectomy so that I can have unprotected sex with my future wife, and then if we ever want to have children, to opt for a sperm donor (some athlete with an IQ above 140).

Can I please get opinions on this?

I’d agree with you on this, but I’m a huge fan of voluntary eugenics. I was fortunate in that the decision was made for me (mumps as a kid), and I’ve had zero sperm motility since well before starting TRT.
Had I not had this happen, I’d have gotten a vasectomy. My genetic line is complete trash. Nothing severe, but shit loads of REALLY bad vision, horrible joint integrity, disgustingly high tendency toward T2D, rampant torsional scoliosis, large quantities of young age cardiovascular failures, etc.
To me, knowingly passing on shitty genes is fucked up in ways that I find hard to articulate. You know these problems exist, yet you’re perfectly content to hand them off to something you are supposed to love and protect above all else? Yeah, that shit’s not okay.

[Fluidic Kimbo]

I’d agree with you on this, but I’m a huge fan of voluntary eugenics. I was fortunate in that the decision was made for me (mumps as a kid), and I’ve had zero sperm motility since well before starting TRT.
Had I not had this happen, I’d have gotten a vasectomy. My genetic line is complete trash. Nothing severe, but shit loads of REALLY bad vision, horrible joint integrity, disgustingly high tendency toward T2D, rampant torsional scoliosis, large quantities of young age cardiovascular failures, etc.
To me, knowingly passing on shitty genes is fucked up in ways that I find hard to articulate. You know these problems exist, yet you’re perfectly content to hand them off to something you are supposed to love and protect above all else? Yeah, that shit’s not okay.

If it was just something like weak joints or crooked teeth, I wouldn't care enough to get a donor.

If I have a kid with a severe case of my inheritable condition (e.g. a severity of 5+ out of 10), then they'll be living with me til the day I die, and then I'll be worried about who will take care of them when I'm gone. Probably wouldn't be able to go on sun holidays to Spain like a normal family.

Personally I think my uncle was unwise to go and have a second child after the first was affected (although maybe he didn't know til it was too late). His kids will be living with him when he's 70.

[Fluidic Kimbo]

bump