Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: TruthSetsUFree

I'm curious, because I contemplated in vitro quite a while back (before my fertility kicked in a little too well). I had planned on telling the doctor to only make embryos that we would actually implant me with (3 max, I guess) and implant all, no selective reductions, etc... Is that not an option? I figure if we were going to pay for it, we could set the ground rules.


47 posted on 02/18/2006 2:05:14 PM PST by I_like_good_things_too
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]


To: I_like_good_things_too

You can set the ground rules, as far as how many embryos (babies) you want "made" (conceived). (Don't you see how the terminology they use really waters this down, making it more "tasteful"?)

However, from what I understand, it costs just as much to "make" a dozen as it does three. There's a very big chance that three will naturally abort on first try, so there's the dilemma: do you pay thousands of dollars for a very large gamble, or do you pay the same ammount for more embryos (babies) with a bigger chance that you'll get at least one baby out of the bunch? And why even conceive three knowing that most likely one or all three won't make it?

To me it's a very low view of life to think that it's worth two babies dying in order to get one. In reality, in most cases it ends up being more than that. For my friend, seven babies died in order for her to have her first. I didn't have the heart to ask her how many they implanted for the second one, nor how many times they tried, before one "took" and made it to birth. It really sickens me.


56 posted on 02/18/2006 3:29:40 PM PST by TruthSetsUFree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson