In order to accomplish an in vitro pregnancy, one must make the conceived child less human than the adults whose needs the child is being produced to meet. As you observed in your earlier post, all sorts of things follow from that.
What reasonable person can't imagine an artificial-reproduction doctor - whose business depends on the eventual production of one live, healthy baby - telling customers, "Don't worry about your dozen frozen children ... someone will adopt them!"?
Yes, Tax-chick, it is truly tragic twisting of conception-—from espousal love and embrace to laboratory machination.
Now it seems that for whatever reasons, infertility is much more common. Build it (the clinic$) and they will come? How much has the modern diet and life stresses generated the need? Well that's another issue, but the cultural rot has enabled all manner of perversion and degredation of the original stated purpose for IVF. What was unseemly in the 70's is now SOP... children are conceived whose parents' reproductive cells were joined in a lab, but the "couple" has never even met for coffee. The same is true for artificial insemination, but with IVF the biological mother needn't even conceive and carry the child herself.
For all of human history, humans took it for granted that they had parents who conceived them naturally, even if the union was brief and/or merely a paid service. Now what of these children who are created in a lab and either brought to birth by another couple, or are the products of a random joining of strangers? At least the former could theoretically identify parents who were in a normal relationship, but the latter? I can't assume that children won't mind being created randomly.
In any case, best not to enable. Kind of like unchecked immigration and illegal infiltrations. Once the aliens get a foothold, the natives and properly assimilated naturalized citizens are powerless to reverse the tsunami.