People who are anti abortion from conception, how do you feel about IVF?

Yes, many women don’t use the coil for that reason.

There must be many more fertilized eggs that do not implant due to the forms of contraception that prevent implantation, than left over from ivf. Theoretically you could have a fertilized egg every month with the coil, or at least the coils without hormones.

Prayers, it was norm who said there were HEFA stats about it. It wasn’t about the Telegraph article.

I’m not pro life Breathlessness. I am however a feminist on a feminist board who has had 2 miscarriages been in a DV situation.

‘Domestic violence has been identified as a prime cause of miscarriage or still-birth and of maternal deaths during childbirth and within the six weeks following birth 11 new mothers were known to have been murdered my their male partners during 2000-02. As shocking is the knowledge that 14% of all the women who died during or immediately after pregnancy had reported domestic violence to a health professional during the pregnancy.‘

From Cardiff women’s aid.

@Goosefoot no one on here has said never. Obv circumstances can change.

I'm assuming that anyone who's against stem cell research will stand by their morals and will refuse treatment that has used stem cell research...

It's also highly regulated in this country. Scientists can fact a lengthy prison term for malpractice. They're not just pissing about willy nilly with a bunch of embryos for shits and giggles. Scientific research is incredibly expensive and funnily enough scientists I know tend to take their work and responsibility seriously.

I view ivf the same way I view abortion and that is that while I would never choose for myself to undertake either I don't believe I have a right to make that decision for anyone else. I will confess to more disquiet? To ivf just because there is a tendency to dehumanise the process and its is open to far more exploitation in terms of economic and ethical issues. I am deeply uncomfortable with the idea of designer babies though I understand where the good intentions are. In short I have no idea whether I am anti abortion or pro choice or not tbh. A lot of anti abortion activists would say I am pro choice and a lot of pro choice would say I am on the other side so I don't know.

Link to telegraph article re 1.7m disposed embryos

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/9772233/1.7-million-human-embryos-created-for-IVF-thrown-away.html

No clear time frame for numbers stated but assume is from when ivf started.....

Also nowhere does it state the stage of the embryos when they were discarded so really the number can not be taken seriously as there is no way of knowing if they were viable or not. Very ambiguous

Article also dated 2012 and ivf legislation has come a looooong way in the uk since then

IME lots of Catholics oppose IVF until they need it, then suddenly it’s all different.

Gotta love the hypocrisy of religion.

A lot of ‘pro-lifers’ seem very interested in miscarriages.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-47487116

I am not at all confused by this thread.

Part of support for women who have had miscarriages is prevention, quality of services and research. It is also about looking at circumstances such as DV risk which is also mitigated by adequate services.

I'm sorry, it simply is not true that viable embryos are never discarded. That is a potentiality n many instances unless deliberately avoided. You can find records of people doing this and talking about it.

And as I said, if it is deliberately avoided, that particular objection isn't relevant, it would be nice if people read whole comments.

But as far as the idea that if it is ethically the same to conceive someone who could die, as it is to conceive someone who you intend to kill, I am not sure why that seems confusing.

Everyone who is conceived will die, sooner or later. Some quite soon. We don't consider it to be an ethical conundrum. On the other hand, we do think killing someone is ethically challenging, even if there are good reasons which may be justifiable.

The MN campaign on miscarriage care was focussed on helping improve services for women who have suffered a miscarriage

It was nothing to do with the causes of miscarriage, because it has been pretty well-established that the vast, vast majority of miscarriages can't be prevented

You seem a bit confused by this thread...

One poster that I could see posted 1.7m. But out of context (as on over what period of time) and also at what stage these embryos were discarded (as in were they viable ones or did it include unviable ones which would be a high number)

Anyone can pluck numbers out the air. They need context

People talking about their ivf experience should give people who clearly don't know about the process some content and see that the "high number" scenario is just not backed up by reality

Breathlessness, maybe you’d like to go and post of all this on MN’s miscarriage campaign thread, then we can all stop worrying about it, creating health and safety laws around it etc.

Breathlessness, because many miscarriages are a consequence of poor maternity care, lack of research, stress on the mother and bad working conditions.

There has been some horseshit on this thread, but this has to take the biscuit

www.miscarriageassociation.org.uk/information/miscarriage/

Where as some actual people who know what they are talking about list zero of those as causes of miscarriages

Miscarriage is the commonest complication of pregnancy. The estimated UK miscarriage rate is 250,000 each year. Doctors believe that roughly 50% of all conceptions never make it to a pregnancy test, and once there is a positive test 15-20% of those miscarry before 12 weeks. Most of them will be classed “sporadic” or “one-off”, caused by chromosomal or genetic abnormalities in the embryo, and will have no bearing on a woman’s future chances of delivering a healthy child.

The Guardian 22/08/210

How are they puzzling?

Other posters have claimed such numbers do exist. You now claim they don’t.

All of you claim to have personally gone through IVF.

Anecdote is not an effective way of allaying fears.

‘Unethical services’

Most fertilized eggs do not implant after sex.

Frozen embryos from ivf are at the same early stage. They would still be floating around in the womb after sex. At that stage a woman would not be pregnant yet, her period wouldn't even be due.

The latest stage they are frozen / put back in womb is a blastocyst. 5 days of growth after egg retrieval. Equivalent to day 20-24 of the menstrual cycle.

And most frozen embryos are at an earlier stage still. Day 2 transfer after egg retrieval - 2 cells. Day 3 transfer after egg retrieval - 6-8 cells.

violent partners, poor quality services, underfunded services, unethical services.

MN actually has a campaign on miscarriage care.

Honestly @Endofthedays your responses are puzzling

Published numbers clearly just don't exist. You are concerned of the moral implications of high numbers of embryos being destroyed

People come on here and explain how the process works (which is also clearly written online if you researched it) so quell your concerns as it clearly is not the case and you just dismiss it.

🤷‍♀️

In the UK, with free healthcare, who is doing that?

Yes in the U.K.

Treating pregnant women so poorly that they miscarry is a moral issue.

What do you think constitutes a moral issue?!

In the UK? And how is that linked to morality?