Thursday, 02 December 2010
-
The Good and Bad of Reproductive Technology?
Reproductive technology has been the subject of may debates in my class lately. How doctors should stop playing God or how it's a step towards a better society.
What are your thoughts? Have you/will you ever consider reproductive technology?
Have you used it? Or would you just adopt if any issues such as infertility comes up?
RecommendRelated Posts
Post a Comment
- Back to momaroo's Momaroo Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in momaroo's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)
About the Author
-
- From: princessremy@xanga
Stats: This Week All Time Posts: 0 1 Views: 0 1569 Comments: 0 26 View all posts by princessremy@xanga
Comments (26)
There is not such thing as "just" adopting, and it pisses me off when people suggest that there is, like buying a kid out of a gumball machine.
My daughters are the product of an IVF cycle. I would not have kids if not for a lot of advanced reproductive technology, since there is no such thing as "just" adopting, especially when you are young and unmarried.
@SeeBeeWrite@xanga - So true. My in-laws were on a waiting list for 12 years before they got my husband. We'd like to adopt when our kids are older & we're more financially stable...but we know it's going to be a very long road.
@SeeBeeWrite@xanga - Agreed...I think that's why I get so pissed when people tell me "well, if you really never get pregnant, you can 'just adopt'!" (we've been TTC a few years now). Obviously the people that say that don't understand anything about the actual adoption process....
I say, if that's what you want/need to do, then freakin' go for it (IVF, etc.)! Why do people see advances in technology as a threat to God...?
If any issues with fertility come up with me, I would adopt. Even if there aren't infertility problems, right now I am seriously considering only adopting children in my future. My parents had two children biologically (including me) and adopted two children internationally and honestly it was a great decision. Adoption is a great thing! There are already so many children in the world who need good parents.
@kristinabean@xanga - @Vallery@xanga - @SeeBeeWrite@xanga - my parents adopted my siblings in 1996 and 2000. In the 1990s adoption wasn't as common as it is now, and my parents wanted to do international adoption, which had numerous restrictions (many countries only let couples adopt if they were proven infertile - my parents were not so they had limited country options). adopting can be expensive and time intensive, but so is IVF - and knowing that you are bringing a child who has already been created another shot at life is worth the wait. both of my siblings were born into extremely poor communities in rural central america and would not have had the vast majority of the opportunities that they have now. my family did not have to wait nearly as long as kristinabean's in-laws - it was perhaps 1-2 years from when they decided to adopt to when we received my sister, but i think that is also dependent on what your 'criteria' is, as some demographics are harder to 'find' than others.
anyway, all i'm saying is don't write off adoption as something that is so far fetched when it is quite less far fetched than IVF (and sometimes IVF doesn't work, as with my parents' friends who tried for 12 years to conceive before adopting two girls internationally in a significantly shorter period of time).
@clandestin_e@xanga - Oh! Don't get me wrong, I think adoption is a wonderful thing! My mother, aunt, uncle, and best friend were ALL adopted. My comment came off as a little too harsh, especially without context...my husband and I are fairly young (mid-20s) and have been TTC for a little longer than we'd like (about 2 years), and are having a lot of trouble finding support. It's not adoption that upsets me in the least; it's that people seem to perceive the process for something it's not. If it came down to it, I would never be against it; it's just frustrating to hear people telling us to give up on trying naturally when we're looking for support, lol.
I'm glad you replied so I could clarify; re-reading it, I realize my comment sounded nothing like I wanted it to, lol.
Also, I think I was just comparing adoption to IVF, in a sense of one being better than another - not calling adoption's credibility into question by itself. Both can be drawn-out and emotionally exhausting processes, and the fact that one gets so much criticism as doctors "playing God" is an issue with me, as I think technological advances are a good thing if that's what you feel is right for you!
@Vallery@xanga - haha of course it's nothing personal. the issue with 'how far is too far with "playing god"' with IVF/etc is very complicated so i usually just stay out of that part of the debate and advertise for the benefits of adoption (which we both realize are many). and you are a young couple and have only been TTC for about two years, i would definitely say keep trying! i've read of lots of ways that conceiving is very complicated and i wouldn't think that having people commanding you to adopt would change that. my mom always says that she knew she wanted kids of her own and had me and then my brother, but after two she felt another calling (it came in the form of God and dreams ;) she still has them but my dad put his foot down...) and knew that adoption was right for her. anyway that was a long wordy comment just to again reiterate that the whole thing is complicated/situational
i would be okay with people trying to get pregnant getting helped. but i hate the idea of people making such a big show out of getting pregnant while they are already having children.
like this octo mom or whatever she is called that people label her as. it was crazy.but if it was just someone who wanted to have children especially single parents or homosexual couples... i don't see why not.i would have used it if i needed it. i just had a portion of my right ovary removed (yesterday) but they really think my fertifily will be fine. if it was not i would adopt. i really dont mind adoption as of now and not going thru the pregnancy again since i have already experenced it and i wanted to give another child a better life.
Now that being said i have watch a lot of my friends go thru this and i am very proud that if this is what they want to do they can. it has been exciting to see how science have helped some of then acheive babies.
Also the little couple on TLC is going thru this but they have some mutations that means that some of their children wouldnt survive very long after birth so they are going thru this now. i dont see a problem with this if there is something that could cause something death upon birth. now i dont believe in doing this just to do it. i dont believe its right to just pick your childs gender but if you have problems then why not.
I don't necessarily see it as doctor's "playing God," but I have to admit that I'm a little torn up about IVF, probably because I subscribe to the "life begins at conception" party. It just doesn't sit well with me to make a batch of embryos, which I consider to be individual lives at the moment of their creation, and just hope that some of them survive. Most IVF rounds insert 1-3 embryos and hopes that even one of them becomes a viable pregnancy, with most rounds failing altogether. How many potential lives are we creating only to immediately destroy them? I just don't like it...
But at the same time, I understand the draw to have YOUR OWN flesh and blood children. Or even if you can't have your own, to even adopt an embryo and carry it as a viable pregnancy. So, like I said, I'm torn and a little undecided about the whole thing. My husband actually works in embryo adoption and I am proud of the work he does to rescue the embryos that would otherwise be experimented on or destroyed. I am amazing that a woman can actually carry another woman's embryo. That's so crazy. And very cool.
My heart goes out to women that have trouble conceiving naturally. I don't like the fact that doctors make a lot of money off a woman's desire to have a child.
I don't have a problem with what others decide to do with their body. If others what to use IVF or IUI, go for it. As for me, if I can't conceive my children on my own after the use of Clomid or any other similiar drugs, I will just accept that God says it was not meant to be. I will adopt and give children a loving home and family. I have no problem with this. I've already made this decision not being married and I informed my mom of this decision; she has no qualms about my decision.
It's great technology for women who normally aren't able to conceive to use and some use it to select embryos without life-threatening genetic diseases that run in the family. (Some people view that as good, some as bad) On the flip side though, it also leaves open the opportunity for eugenics, where parents select gender, traits, and so on. If used with it's original intention of allowing certain women to be able to conceive, then it's good. When it gets abused to select the "ideal" child then it becomes bad.
@TifaRose@xanga - Agreed. Things like this unfortunately start to become fads for the rich and famous. :-/
I HATE IT HATE IT HATE IT HATE IT!
If you can't have kids, adopt. There are already so many children who need homes.
@mevlink@xanga - Isn't that how nature works? There are a fair number of pregnancies that end in miscarriage before the woman even knows she's pregnant. Not all embryos, naturally conceived or not, will survive.
@VampireOfSeduction@xanga - Why do you "hate" it? Adoption isn't for everyone. Some people are not psychologically prepared to adopt, which is far different than going through pregnancy and giving birth. Some people just cannot make a connection with a child that is not genetically theirs. I would prefer that kids who get adopted are adopted by people seeking to adopt instead of resorting to it as a last resort, or doing it because they feel guilty about children not having families. I think in those instances, there will be a lack of emotion between the child and the new family, and more "go backs" will occur, which I daresay must be more heartbreaking to a child than not having a family at all.
@Mangonese@xanga - Yes, you're right, I guess. Lots of pregnancies naturally don't become viable. But at the same time, most IVF treatments create an entire BATCH of embryos so that they don't have to go through the whole collection process repeatedly. That means creating potentially hundreds of embryos that will ultimately die or be destroyed. Like I said, I'm still totally torn on the subject, but no, I wouldn't say that nature does works that way. I'm not sure how many embryos in my lifetime will miscarry, but I highly doubt its even remotely comparable to the amount of embryos that are destroyed in the laboratory. It seems like an awful waste of life to me! But then again, that's why my husband does what he does in Embryo Adoption, to try and make sure that these embryos are rescued and given a chance to survive. Like I said, I'm totally torn! Especially if our science keeps improving and not so many embryos are lost in the process... and I realize that the only way to get there is to keep developing the science... So again, totally torn! :)
If a man or woman is infertile, they shouldn't be having babies. Adopt a child. The less medical intervention there is, the better our species will survive in the long run. Same can be said as far as colds and flus are concerned.
@Mangonese@xanga - I have moral qualms with the whole of using
non-natural means of interfering with reproduction. What I mean is that
if there were a (safe) herb that resulted in better sperm production, I
wouldn't have an issue with it. But I do have an issue with that type of
surgery (as opposed to life-saving or pain-reducing surgeries) and with
artificially creating children. (Brave New World, anyone?)
I
view an embryo as life, and many attempts fail, and the embryo dies.
(Yes, this happens naturally and many natural pregnancies are terminated
before the mother is even aware she was ever pregnant, but nature will
do what it will, and it's not a justification for human manipulation.)
Even worse is that another side-effect of the whole thing is idiots like "octo-mom."
And it also opens the door for "choosing your own baby." The whole thing just seems so counter-evolutionary.
If people are having reproductive problems, why shouldn't we help them if we have the ability to?
But there's nothing bad about adopting either.
@VampireOfSeduction@xanga -
No, not like Brave New World at all. The embryos aren't "artificially created". It is just doing the same thing outside of the body what the body should be doing itself but isn't. I don't see how using medical equipment and a microscope is any less natural than your idea of a chemical remedy.
If I discovered that I was not able to have a child naturally, hell yea I would turn to technology. But I don't know if this is a good thing in the long run. Maybe some people are impotent for a reason (such as genetic deformities) and giving them the ability to reproduce may harm the overall health of the future human population.
I give thanks every day that my dream of becoming a mother to a baby with her daddy's smile came true. I wouldn't have her if it weren't for ART.