Posted on 10/28/2018 4:13:53 PM PDT by deport
This was less than ideal for the health of the baby.
If the child is male, there was a sperm donor involved.
************
Correct....
With Ashleigh and Bliss, Doody harvested eggs from Bliss and introduced it to
sperm from a donor in the INVOcell. It was then placed in Bliss to allow
fertilization and formation of the embryos for five days. The embryos were
then removed and frozen until Ashleigh was ready to receive them.
With traditional Effortless IVF, the woman who donates the egg is usually
the one that will receive the embryo. But because the egg and embryo came
from Bliss and were put in Ashleigh, this makes this case unique.
At least they didn’t name him after a pussy hat.
Complete oblivious disregard for the little boy's need for a father and a mother. It's all about how they, the parents, serve their own feelings and get what they want.
The difference between a kid and a commodity --- in this scenario, an expensive pet --- is now officially nil.
If it was two fathers and no mothers his life would be 20 years of pederasty and a suicide.
Of course there was a sperm donor—as the article itself says!
But the poor kid is being treated as if the “father” (or any father) doesn’t count!!!!
Some children grow up and try to find the sperm donor who made his or her life possible. That’s only one scenario as to what will happen with this little boy!!!!
The difference between a kid and a commodity --- in this scenario, an expensive pet --- is now officially nil.
I know of someone (single) who adopted a little girl, same sort of thing.
Playing God will not go well, especially for the child. Those who harm a child in any way will invite disaster, one way or another.Pity the child.
Is there any medical benefit to this 6 day stopover?
Frozen. Kidsicles.
What a loving mother!
They’ll see. And it’ll probably be sooner than later. Keep track of this couple.
Artificial abomination paraded as social evolution.
Deliberately exposing him to enhanced risk in an experimental process. Well, he has no rights: he’s a commodity concocted in a commercial transaction, so what the hell.
No, it was just a gimmick to say the baby was carried by both of them.
With adoption, (unless you are child trafficker) you are responding to the needs of an already-born child whose natural family, by some mischance or malfeasance, is not there to care for her.
I repeat: adoption is responding as well as you can to the needs of an already-existing child born into an deprived situation which everybody acknowledges was sad, not optimal. It's set upo to meet the child's needs.
IVF in this case is the intentional concoction of a child for the express purpose of raising him fatherless. It is not responding to the needs of the child (as well as we can) but creating a child whose needs have already been definitively set aside.
Everyone has a father. No one has two mothers.
They’ll learn ... if not in this life, then the next.
Because kids with no dads grow up so well adjusted.
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.