Posted on 01/12/2014 6:16:42 PM PST by Salvation
I have identical twins, so it was natural When I find out someone I know is undergong fertility treatments, I make sure theyunderstand that they are at risk for having multiples and how hard it is to have twins.
I was on complete bedrest for my twins. They were born healthy at 36 and a half weeks, but then they got sick at 6 weeks old and both almost died. One of them has a brain injury. She’s had a difficult time with speech, but with los of work she is now a junior in high school with straight As. My other daugther was doing great until 2 years ago. She was diagnosed with a movement disorder, dystonia. She was in a ventilator for a month when she was a baby, so I wonder if it affected her some way.
I had ine friend tell me the risks were small for her having twins, and I told her the risk for me was small. She had twins.
I tend to think having other embryos get killed for me would bother me. At least I’d like to think so. And that’d be with my natural parents being involved. As noted, this stuff opens up the possibility for a lot of mischief.
Drawbacks not mentioned:
Growing movement to identify sperm donors.
Two people with dubious ethics raising a child.
The danger of having a child with a half-sibling or other close relative is now minimized by the nationwide status of the cryobanks. They used to be local, but now the stuff is frozen and shipped by FedEx Overnight, so the chances are slimmer.
Adoption of older children is now more acceptable with the growth of Internet support groups. These people become very close through daily discussion of their shared problems. That is the real need: for older children to be given permanent homes, so they don’t have the sword of separation hanging over their head.
As a father, I understand fully the desire to have a child. I also understand the arguments for and against IVF.
Regarding the article only, I saw most of the clinical risks not particularly significant, as I have had low birth weight children with no issue. However, it was disconcerting to see the retinal cancer and syndrome found in the Dutch study.
Generally speaking, I am against IVF because it creates and then destroys embryos. I don’t fault people for wanting to have their “own” children, but can’t support the process.
May it happen again.
((
I second that.
Outrageous procedure.
Definitely.
Were these IVF babies?
Some good thoughts, thanks.
The answer is adoption imo. If a couple does not want to adopt a child (when they can’t have their own in usual fashion), they probably would not make a very good parent to begin with.
<><><><><
Wow. That may be one of the most ridiculous things I’ve read on this forum.
There is no logic therein whatsoever.
I have no IVF kids, for the record.
Makes sense to me. But we know of three solid loving families who have both natural born (to them) kids (and when they couldn’t have any more), they didn’t mess with science, they saw it as a “sign,” and they adopted.
Makes sense to me.
<><><<>
Of course it does. It was your opinion to begin with.
I have to wonder if your opinion is based on your distaste of the procedure, because we don’t have to go very far to find bad parenting of natural born kids.
My theory is a little different (for which I have the same exact lack of objective data as you do for your opinion). Couples choosing to remain childless usually have made the right decision (for themselves). But all I have is, as I suspect is the case with you, anecdotes.
No! As I said, they were identical twins. It’s just very risky to have twins.
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.