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

I've never actually thought about this. As a student nurse I was there when a woman was implanted with an embryo and I saw several in the storage area. It was a long time ago now and I can't remember my thoughts about it. It mustn't have made much of an impact. On the same placement I was in theatre for a surgical abortion. I'll never forget that.
I've never settled on a side of the fence with abortion but I'm probably pro-life. However I know that things are rarely simple and there are many factors so I find it impossible to settle on an opinion. I'm catholic and maybe that flavours my thoughts. I don't know. The whole subject upsets me tbh as I feel so conflicted from both sides of the debate.

That isn’t what is being asked Praying.

No I don't have the numbers but I do have first hand experience and have actually been through the process

Praying, so you don’t actually know the numbers.

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

How on earth is miscarriage a moral issue?

@Endofthedays no idea of actual numbers but just have a read of the infertility boards and you will see very very few! Very few people have embryos to freeze and very few times does ivf work first time. If it does in my case and I have 2 spare embryos they will be used to "hopefully" have more children.

I suspect the numbers of healthy blasts discarded to be very very low

Miscarriage is not merely unfortunate. It is a complex social and moral issue.

How many viable embryos are discarded then?

Dervel There was also a high profile celebrity case, Sofia Vergera and Nick Loeb. She wanted the embryos destroyed, he didn't, so he had the embryos sue her for their right to life. Yep, the embryos sued her. He lost.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Loeb

The particular objection of some pro-life persons is that in IFV you knowingly create embryos with the idea that if there are too many, they will be discarded

But that is just not true. At all.

In IVF, you knowingly create embryos based on how many eggs you produce
And then those embryos are observed for a couple of days to see which ones develop normally, and which ones don't develop normally and therefore die off. Just like in a natural conception where they would be flushed out of the body.
Those 'dead' embryos - which are just a 6-10 cell microscopic ball - are discarded. But let's not weirdly fetishise some dead cells, unless you also cry a river when you scrub your face.

If you're lucky like me and get 3 or 4 good embryos, some go back and some get frozen to become future potential siblings.

I've had plenty of IVF and none of my embryos were 'discarded' anywhere other than into my cervix

But I still don't understand why getting pregnant naturally, when you know you have a condition which will almost certainly lead to a miscarriage is merely unfortunate but IVF is 'morally repugnant'

If life begins at conception, then you're condemning that embryo to a death sentence just as you would if you have IVF knowing that embryo won't be put back

@Goosefoot as many who have been through the ivf process, included myself, have commented on this thread..... yes embryos are discarded in the process but these are the ones that are NOT viable, that have stopped progressing and would never result in a pregnancy. The (uncommon case of) viable good quality blasts are then frozen for future use. But this is very very far from "high numbers"

Ivf clinics do not discard high numbers of high quality embryos that would result in a pregnancy. It just is not the case

I’d be interested to know how people who are anti abortion in all cases feel about Universal Credit.

I'm not sure how you are concluding that, Stopthepplanet.

When is the moment of conception?

Conception: How It Works

To become pregnant, the following steps must occur:

Sperm transport — The sperm must be deposited and transported to the site of fertilization.

Egg transport — Ovulation must occur and the egg must be "picked up" by the tube.

Fertilization and embryo development — Union between the sperm and egg must result.

Implantation — The embryo must implant and begin to grow in the uterus.

All of the above steps have to take place in order to say that conception has taken place. Those of you insisting that conception is at the moment of fertilization don't appear very versed in fertility.

Where is the judgement of them? Are they also 'morally repugnant' for wanting to try and have a baby even though they knew there was a high chance an embryo wouldn't make it?

I don't see this as very similar. In the kinds of cases you are talking about, someone conceives, and sadly the baby dies at some point before birth of natural causes. As do we all.

The particular objection of some pro-life persons is that in IFV you knowingly create embryos with the idea that if there are too many, they will be discarded (from this perspective, killed) and that people do in fact discard them. Obviously this doesn't apply when that is deliberately avoided in the process, and it doesn't cover all the reasons people object to IFV, but its what is comparable to your example.

There is always going to be an ethical difference between someone dying of natural causes, without any intent, and someone being deliberately destroyed.

Lysis, here:

www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-29/why-alabama-s-abortion-law-includes-an-exemption-for-infertility

@GrumbleBumble

There was this case in Arizona:
www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.azcentral.com/amp/3205867002

It’s a massive ethical conundrum a woman got breast cancer and told she would be unlikely to be able conceive following treatment. So she and her then boyfriend had embryo’s frozen in case they got married one day and wanted children. Well they did but then got divorced and she wanted to use those embryos to start a family in the future without his consent. The court ruled in her favour but it’s impossible balance rights here fairly and justly?

I accept you are talking about (UK) law but I think we need to examine all the ramifications of any position.

One of the Alabama(?) congressmen who'd voted to ban abortion was asked about left over embryos, and he stated that they only cared about the embryos in women's bodies. It really is about controlling women. I'll see if I can find the exact quote somewhere.

@naughtynorm

“I'm sure some posters on this thread would like to see something like the hand maids tale, the ability to have children reserved for those that can pay for the treatment.“

I’m undecided on a precise ethical position on IVF. As to who pays for it I do believe that if it is a question of publicly funding IVF on a stretched NHS budget basic triage principles would mean that life saving procedures should have adequate provision ahead of others.

I do however believe in the general principle that children cost a lot of resources quite aside from the cost of IVF, and I believe that bringing children into the world that you can’t afford does neither the parent, society or even sometimes the child much good. So framing parenthood as a right is dangerous.

However the fact that opportunities for social mobility have utterly stalled in recent decades is the issue that upstream is causing the problem. I do recognise it is a pretty fundamental human desire to procreate so wanting to live a peaceful life and having a couple of children should not be an unreasonable aspiration for a majority of people to have, but committing vast amounts of time and resources to ensure everyone who wants them get as many as they like would be folly.

Many of the things are carefully considered because their are significant moral issues around IVF that need considering by society and always will do.

Yes, there are also significant moral issues around single parents, and these are discussed all the time.

Endofdays in the UK many of the things you list have been carefully considered and a judgement has been made on whether they are acceptable or not. Sex selection is not allowed in UK clinics, neither is screening for "undesirable traits" (assuming you mean non medical issues). A man can't have his ex-wifes embryo implanted into another woman. what happens to embryos after a set time period is laid out in legal documents signed at the start of the process.

Child’s feelings about being implanted into an unrelated mother one of the most heart breaking things I've ever watched on TV was a documentary about a man searching for his biological father his mother gave him no information about his father and he was desperate to find out where he came from. He was the result of a one night stand (or possibly prostitution). Children can end up distressed by their background when they result from sex.

Ivf is heavily monitored in the UK. The irony of a being a child protection social worker who was being assessed for my moral fitness to under go ivf at the same time as I watched women who had had their last dc removed for abuse and neglect become pregnant again wasn't lost on me.
There are significant double standards in the amount of intrusion and control women who under go ivf have to accept compared to those who can reproduce using sex.

Lysis, they’re moral questions, not ones that can be answered by stating the law.

The screening for significant genetic conditions is an interesting one, as I understand that ivf is recommended to some couples in that situation who could reproduce through sex.
The ability to screen to ensure that any implanted embryos are healthy seems a tremendous thing.