Posted on 06/23/2005 5:52:53 AM PDT by Mr. Silverback
It was a birthday party the likes of which the White House had never before seen: The guests of honor—-Tanner Brikman, 4, and Noelle Faulk, 2--had spent the first few years of their lives in frozen limbo; so had their small companions, now sitting on the floor of the dining room enjoying slices of chocolate-covered cake.
All 21 of these kids had once been “leftover embryos”—tiny humans who remained stored in liquid nitrogen tanks when their genetic parents had borne all the children they wanted via in-vitro fertilization (IVF). Some of their siblings remain in these frozen orphanages; One day, perhaps, they will be thawed and implanted in the wombs of their adoptive mothers--women who want to enlarge their families with children genetically related to the first child.
At the White House, adult guests stared with fascination at children who had been frozen for up to eight years—lively youngsters now dressed in pink party frocks and blue plaid rompers, bouncing on White House sofas and watching with delight as the presidential helicopter lands just outside the window. Just how old are these kids, anyway? If a three-year-old has been frozen for eight years, is he actually eleven?
At a press conference earlier in the day, the children’s parents introduced them to reporters and shared their concerns about a bill calling for federal funding for embryonic stem cell research—research that would destroy thousands of other “leftover” embryos.
Among the parents was Steve Johnson, a paraplegic who, with his wife Kate, adopted an embryo whom they named Zara—now a little girl in a pink flowered dress and blond curls playing near her father’s wheelchair. Johnson described the years of pain, high medical costs, and limited mobility he’d endured after a bike accident 12 years before. “My soul aches for a cure for my paralysis,” he said—but not at the cost of a child’s life. “Would I kill my daughter so I could walk again? Of course not. Then why do we think it is okay to kill someone else’s kid?” he asked.
Janet and Kevin Mason juggled twin toddler sons as they described their despair after six years of attempting to conceive a child. After learning of the Snowflake Embryo Adoption program, they adopted 16 stored embryos; Caleb and Jordan are the result.
A genetic mother described how hard it was to give up children “in a suspended state”—but ultimately decided that allowing another couple to adopt them was the best option. An adoptive mom pointed out that “leftover” embryos can cure at least one tragic disease—infertility—without being killed in the process. If stored embryos are destroyed in the quest to cure other ailments, she asked, what do you say to the half-million infertile couples who desperately want a child?
The parents spent a lot of time countering the claims of the hucksters of embryonic stem cell research. For instance, there are not 400,000 “leftover” embryos that are “just going to die anyway,” as these people claim; Less than three percent—approximately 11,000 embryos—have been earmarked for research by their parents. The rest are saved for future use by parents or for donation to other infertile couples.
Parents also pointed out that, despite the hype, embryonic stem cell research has failed to provide a single treatment. Meanwhile, adult stem cell research has led to breakthroughs in treating Parkinson’s, spinal cord injuries, and juvenile diabetes.
All the parents agreed: There is no such thing as a “leftover embryo;” The twenty-one children in the room, clinging to their mother’s legs and sleeping in their father’s arms, shatter the myth that they are not human and not alive. Which one, they asked, would you sacrifice on the altar of science?
Down the street, members of Congress argued about the “need” to fund the destruction of still-frozen children just like them--and then voted in favor of doing so. Unaware of the vote, the “leftover embryos” were squeezing the last moments of fun out of their White House party. There were curtains to hide behind, cookies to steal—and maybe, just maybe, that nice man who gave the speech would give them a ride on his helicopter.
Anne Morse is a Senior Writer for BreakPoint.
BreakPoint/Chuck Colson Ping!
If anyone wants on or off my Chuck Colson/BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
ProLife Ping!
If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
"Snowflake embryo" adoption is nice, but people are kidding themselves if they think this is going to make the tiniest dent in the backlog of hundreds of thousands of embryos generated by IVF. The number is high and rising.
Hollywood would sacrifice them all if it meant one less wrinkle, and one more year in the spotlight. I never for minute believe the pro-death elite in Hollywood altruistically want to cure anything that won't help their narcissism.
IVF is bad news, IMHO. Adoption (snowflake or otherwise) should be job one.
Fantastic article.
I haven't seen this reported anywhere else.
"I'm ready for my closeup, Mr. DeMille."
LOL.
She really does a good job describing the scene with the kids, and all the imagery is very charming.
"Adoption (snowflake or otherwise) should be job one."
I agree. 100%. I have a friend who tried through (it felt like) ALL of her 30's to conceive. She had a number of leftover "snowflakes" but she donated them to impregnate other women when it didn't work out for her.
In the spectrum of options, I guess that was the best thing to do, but still, to not clinically create life would've been the best option because, of course, it meant the death of the embyos that didn't stick to her (or other women's) uterus lining.
And she and her husband are very Catholic! Never understood it. It was doubly hard because the other three of us that still hang together were either pregnant a time or two, or in my case, adopting during that time.
I guess that burning desire to be a Mom trumps all for some couples.
So, wait-she tried to concieve naturally through her 30s, THEN then adopted a snowflake, or had her own eggs and her husband's own sperm to create the embryo, or tried to have IVF done through her 30s?
This Snowflake gathering at the White House was intentionally ignored by the MSM. It occurred weeks ago and I caught a brief mention and then it was gone.
Thank you for the heartwarming...this cold morning! May G-d bless these children born and those patiently waiting, with life unfolded by caring wisdom...
Just how old are these kids, anyway? If a three-year-old has been frozen for eight years, is he actually eleven?
That's just nonsense. Age is determined by counting from birth, not from conception. A premature baby doesn't have months taken off its age. A baby born late doesn't get "credit" for the extra weeks spent in the womb.
"...or had her own eggs and her husband's own sperm to create the embryo, or tried to have IVF done through her 30s?"
She was implanted at least six times during ten years, not to mention all the fertility shots, the egg harvesting, the cup-o-sperm from the husband and the emotional roller coaster she put us all through. She gave it up when she hit 40, then became a Foster Parent. I think they spent about $50K on this, beyond what insurance covered for them. I have no idea how many embyos were actually used in this whole process. At least two dozen or more, I'd guess: they implant you with a few at a time, hoping one or more will develop.
This was 20 years ago when IVF was marketed as "A Miracle of Modern Science" for desperate women who wanted to conceive. She bought it, hook, line & sinker.
'The number is high and rising.' And therein is the reason for this next phase of dehumanization succeeding with legislators ... the embryo aged humans have already been dehumanized as a commodity to be stored in freezers if not used in the IVF process (they conceive more than they will likely need, 'just in case'). The way to fix this portion of the evil is to limit IVF procedure to two or three embryos conceived and each viable embryo implanted, with no 'leftover' embryos and no abortion if two or three implant successfully (current practice suggests aborting any more than two or three, 'to give the survivors a better chance'). This is as good an illustration of the slippery slope as one could find. Once the embryo aged humans were successfully dehumanized to commodity status, the next steps with these 'commodities' as research material is occurring.
"Age is determined by counting from birth, not from conception." Don't know much about other cultures I see. Talk to a few Koreans. My beautiful granddaughter is 'half' Korean and her Korean relatives count her age from conception. But that might not interest you ...
What happened to the other 14? Do any of them still exist? Are the Mason's going to keep those that remain frozen forever, dispose of them, or donate them to research? Having "adopted" 16, do they bear any responsibility for any that are unused?
I actually knew that - my cousin is an adopted Korean/American. But while it's personally interesting, I'm not concerned with cultural relativism.
In our society, we count age from birth, not conception. The writer of the article stretched too far to make the point and lost me there.
The 'baby doctor' counts from the last menses, to establish age of the unborn little one. What you refer to is a cultural convention, not a sceintific system. There was a time in America when one could meet someone who didn't know their birth date or even their birth year. Think of the implications!
I can imagine it. Alexander Hamilton, one of our Founding Fathers and as close to a son as George Washington ever had, wasn't sure of his own birth year.
Amen to that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.