When you combine the treacly sentimentality of Facebook with a Hallmark Holiday such as Father’s Day one’s literary expectations must be set low. Nonetheless, I found something interesting in an MIT friend’s feed:
When I was born, sophisticated families fed their babies with formula, instead of nursing. And my father, who was not a control freak by any means, somehow made it his job to prepare my formula each and every day because he trusted no one else to do it, including my mother or our housekeeper. Now I realize that lack of trust might sound a bit mean, but you must understand that my mother never cooked a meal in her life, and was quite willfully perplexed in the kitchen. When my father died, she lost nearly 40 lbs in the following months, because she had no idea how to prepare food. My dad had cooked for her the prior quarter century and was such a good cook, she had no reason to learn.
Anyway, back to when I was an infant, my father insisted on preparing my formula daily, despite his busy schedule. He worked for General Electric at the time, and occasionally would have to fly from Detroit to Schenectady for a multi-day trip. And when he did, he had GE fly him back home every night and out every morning, just so he could prepare my formula. This went on for well over a year. Fortunately, my father was well-liked and highly valued, so he got away with costing his company extra money (sorry shareholders!)–just so he could be a good dad.
[What period of American life are we talking about? She was born in 1961.]
Readers: What’s the best thing that you saw yesterday on Facebook related to Father’s Day? Please cut and paste into the comments!
JR Smith’s press conference speech after game 7 of the NBA finals.
…my father was well-liked and highly valued…
That seems like an understatement. Passenger air travel was an expensive luxury in the early 1960’s.
That was quite a story. Wonder how much was motivated by the polio epidemic of the 1950’s. Air travel involved a lot less waiting in security lines. Makes the rest of us wonder what kind of fathers we would have been if we had more money in our 20s & didn’t move to Silicon Valley.
http://nypost.com/2016/06/12/professor-who-donates-sperm-in-city-bathrooms-has-sired-22-kids/
Relevant section:
The first five women he worked with successfully sued him for child support, and nearly half of his paycheck is garnished for his offspring.
“I don’t know what’s more surprising: that five sued or that 17 didn’t,” Nagel says. “They were all well aware there was no financial obligation on my part. They all promise in advance they won’t sue.”
The cynic in me says the father was flying home to keep a check on Mom.
John: Thanks for the link. I’ll write about that in a future post. The sixth woman to sue under New York’s laws (see http://www.realworlddivorce.com/NewYork ) isn’t entitled to anything. Each child has a different cash value depending on when the mom filed her lawsuit. The first four plaintiffs are supposed to get essentially 100% of the defendant’s after-tax income. I’m not sure what went wrong here such that he still has half of his income to spend. Maybe he was sued a long time ago when his income was lower and the plaintiffs haven’t come back asking for a recalculation.
This doesn’t seem fair to #s six and above children, who after all didn’t ask to be born. I think the father should be required to pay 150% of his after tax income. If he doesn’t come up with the money, let’s see how much he likes debtor’s prison! It’s in the best interests of the children.
Very uplifting only-Dad’s-formula-will-do story, but I have to wonder… anyone at this level of… offspring-welfare dedication and/or sophistication(?) surely would make a risk-benefit analysis of what might happen in case of his own demise… the kid would starve or get poisoned by a successor’s improperly whipped-up formula. Frequent flying (in a small plane) also means higher risk of an accident [despite what Phil might say, and back it up with statistics]. If he really cared that much about proper feeding of his beloved daughter, he first should have arranged for Emergency Succession, taught the Art of His Formula to one, or more chosen Just-In-Case someones (to assist the survivor-Mother), etc. That seems to me to be any single parent’s (as essentially here) primary responsibility: to ensure carer succession security for one’s kid COME WHAT MAY.
In fact, every time I hear some mom talk how well she and the kid manage just fine without the absentee (usually deadbeat) father, I respond with a question: have you considered what might happen to the Kid if you succumbed to something nasty? Some reply that (assuming prolonged dying of cancer) there will be ample time to arrange things. None has entertained the thought, nor welcomes speculation, of expiring in a hasty, instant traffic-death way, say. At best (in one instance) the woman countered with X hasn’t shown any interest in raising Z up to now, so why should I expect anything better from him after I’m gone. (I elected not to pursue the inquiry by pointing out that, ehrmm…, perhaps there is someone stopping him from assuming a share of the responsibilities?)
ObLitRef: […] “I never met my father and regret snubbing his sole overture, a card on my 21st birthday. There was an address in Weston-super-Mare and a handwritten message. “In case you ever feel like getting in touch.”
Now, I find it heartbreaking but as a callow 21-year-old, I could only view him as the man who had failed to help my mother in any way, refusing even to honour a promise to pay child support.” […]
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/jun/25/stanley-kubrick-ruined-my-childhood-my-mum-the-hollywood-publicist
BTW. Speaking of the Sperm-spreader professor’s fate, I wonder if there exist some literary works/ novels, where, faced with a paternity suit in spite of an earlier agreement not to be sued for that, the “donor” kills the offspring, and then mounts a defense of, say, temporary insanity due to distress of having been lied to/ taken advantage of in such a demeaning manner (=being reduced to a sperm and near-perpetual cash fount). After all, literature is where such unpleasant scenarios should be played out… e.g. “We Need To Talk About Kevin” in which Lionel Shriver[*] imagines her protagonist-mother of a recent Columbine-style school killer, now in prison.
[^*] an American living in the UK, who’s on record of “just not wanting any kids in spite of being able to afford several“