The amount of mitochondrial DNA is tiny though (~0.1%, according to the article), and not particularly unique to any individual, since it is passed down lately unchanged apart from the occasional mutation. There's no point having 3 biological parents unless there's a bad mutation in the mother's mitochondrial DNA.

> In vivo zygote mitochonrial transplantation. Neat!

Absolutely not. This is in vitro:

>> The eggs from both the mother and the donor are fertilised in the lab with the dad's sperm.

In vivo would make no sense.

>In vivo would make no sense.

It would certainly be one of the more stranger ways to explain the birds and the bees

Woops, thanks for the correction.

We already crossed this with donor eggs and surrogacy. As for multiparent households i am aware of recent developments and will not say more.

Your conclusion has no supporting evidence.

This would be awesome for so many households. We should stop acting like two biological parents is the only way to go.

I'm not sure there's any point to it. I know a couple poly families and my own situation isn't far off. The kids have a similar relationship with their parents as two-parent kids do. What DNA they happen to have doesn't matter, outside the occasional teenage outburst.

That is the case in many poly families, and I feel pretty much the same, however some people actually care about stuff like DNA and lineage. Having that as an option for some folks would be pretty cool. For instance, in cases where one person is infertile, they can still donate mitochondria.

I agree there are plenty of people who feel that way. I just question if healthcare providers will go along with it. Cases like this one where it's medically necessary are one thing, but "hey, Martha wants to be parent #3" is a different matter.