Recently I came across the term diblings. Diblings was used
as a term to describe siblings (half or otherwise) that would exist in other
families as a result of donor conception. For example two families used the
same sperm donor making the children technically half-siblings. So these would
be termed donor conceived siblings or diblings.
So here we have an example of people creating a term to
replace a perfectly good word that describes the situation accurately. Half-siblings
are what they technically are. Some argue that the term “half” is rather
demeaning and that they are just siblings. Either way those pre-existing terms
describe the biological relationship between those people accurately.
So why create a new term? It is not cute. It even sounds
like dribblings - as if they are dribbling. All it does is try to further devalue
the significance of the relationship. If we were to acknowledge that they are
indeed siblings or half-siblings then that might make people feel bad about
them not growing up with or ever knowing each other.
It is analogous to how some people in the donor conception
triad (recipient parents, donors, offspring) or even society itself, refuse to
acknowledge that the donor is indeed the child’s father. Of course they are a
father, they begot the child, which was the original meaning of the term. But
because some were worried that the raising male parent might feel put off by
this, they had to be called father too, and subsequently the definition of
father changed over the years to reflect this change. By not acknowledging that
the donor is indeed a father and the father of that child, it makes it easier
to justify the separation and the lack of contact/interaction. Because if we
did not know the circumstances of that child’s conception and someone informed
you that the child grew up never knowing their father, of course you would
think that that was tragic. But when we are informed the father was a sperm
donor all of a sudden it becomes acceptable.
Sure the raising male parent acts as a father and does all
those things a father should do (and no doubt in many instances does an amazing
job), which meets one of the current definitions of father, but by another definition
the donor is a father to that child as well. We need to stop trying to rebadge
things to make ourselves feel better about our choices but acknowledge them for
what they truly are.
A donor conceived person will love their parents for who
they are, not what label has been attached to them. Nor should they have the
relationship with their biological father devalued by stating that he is not
their father. And so too by extrapolation a donor conceived person should not
have their relationship status with their siblings or half-siblings trivialised
to a dribble – oops I mean dibling.
