Do you believe IVF is ok?

[Ididivfama]

I’ve been reading a lot of the surrogacy threads recently (and I know that is a different topic) but I was curious to mumsnet posters ideas of ethics and ivf. You can see from my name that we ended up doing it, but I won’t be horribly offended by different views. I’m more curious.

Obviously it’s ’unnatural’ as a process and there is the issue of what happens to any extra blastocysts (I use the term blastocyst as they are pre-embryo stage and calling them embryos makes people view it differently - at least I did!) Even so, would you count leaving blastocysts to decay as abortion? I never did but I’ve read that view now so I’m curious as to how many people view it like that.

As is pointed out on the surrogacy threads - no one is ‘entitled’ to have a child. Is that the same for us ivf parents?

@HowDoYouSolveAProblemLikeMyRear and I’m guessing morning after pill too?

"I don’t agree with ivf because there are too many unwanted babies and I think there should be more efforts to find parents for those kids."

That is factually incorrect.

Correct me if I’m wrong but isnt the blastocyst akin to the mass (for want of a more precise term) of divided cells, v shortly following fertilisation, making their way down the fallopians tubes to embed in the uterus as an embryo?

If so, doesn’t a huge number of fertilised eggs never successfully embed anyway? I once had strange symptoms yet then got my period late and I always assumed this happened to me but I’m probably wrong.

well, technically, (apologies if this sounds rude as this is not my intent) they are not viable "where they currently are" - so no matter your views on abortion (would be viable if left where they are mostly) not sure how you can say they are 'viable humans'

Can you say someone is incorrect in their feelings?
Should there not be more efforts to find decent parents for unwanted children( not just babies ) ?

There aren’t lots of unwanted babies. Of course any unwanted child is sad. You never answered if you adopted.

Presumably you have adopted from one of these countries yourself?

I'm comfortable with my ivf use.

The surrogacy discussion doesnt have implications for ivf using own eggs and own body, but does relate to the use of donor eggs, and (it also relates to being anti prostitution, ie renting a woman's body for your own purposes, not hers, which in turn has implications with regard to porn).

I agree IVF is a bit odd (for want of a better word!) when you think about it, but I’m not against it.

I am not sure if it should be funded by the NHS though - and I say that as someone who will likely need it.

I'm not worried about blastocysts being destroyed. I am pro choice anyway.

I have some concerns about donar eggs in terms of impact on the donar's health. but i guess many are people doing their own ivf anyway so donating 'spares'.

I feel the same @Imisscoffee2021 I have 7 remaining and its agony knowing I need to make a decision on them.

I didnt see a question directed to me, but no I have not adopted.

I would have considered it, along with IVF should I not have conceived without help - I wouldnt have ruled anything out.

I tried to be clear and say I do understand the want and need to have your own baby, and why people do go for IVF - I would never judge anyone for having it. I just wonder (I have no scientific background) if we should.

anyone who thinks those needing ivf should adopt Instead should at least 1) adopt themselves and 2) also believe that everyone should adopt first before trying to have their own biological child.

Fair enough, I was just curious.

Exactly this & the women who believe it's a medical treatment for a medical condition. You don't 'need' to bear a child to be healthy. It's definitely not a medical need.

Many celebs use IVF, so they can have the sex of the baby that they want.

This sort of IVF doesn’t sit right me with.

But IVF for struggling to conceive purposes doesn’t bother me, even though it’s not technically natural.

So for me, it’s the ethics and the reasons that it’s done that I judge, rather than the actual act - which is exactly how I feel about surrogacy too.

IVF for a married couple, or civil partners, I agree with. In other words, some evidence of a stable and possibly lasting relationship.

Surrogacy I have reservations about.

I’m also very pro embryonic stem cell research, using women’s unwanted blastocysts and so I think IVF can create a lot of extra benefits for people needing these stem cells.

We are so far removed in the world we live in from what is “natural” anymore. We buy our bit of meat from a supermarket not having to go through the process of catching, slaughtering and cutting up the animal ourselves (and have the privilege to not even think about this while shovelling it into our mouths). Saying IVF is not natural is disregarding a whole section of society- LGBT people, infertile people, single women who don’t want a partner. I’m a gay woman who used IVF, there was no “natural” way for my partner and I to get pregnant yet him growing inside me and giving birth to him, then raising him felt like the most natural thing in the world. Who cares how they are created? As long as they are loved and wanted and treated properly. I do not, however, agree with being able to use ivf to select sex which is actually legal in the US (thankfully not in the UK) as this could have huge ramifications for gender imbalances for future generations

If they have lost so many babies then it sounds like they have no issue conceiving. So in what way would IVF be helpful?

That doesn’t make any sense. More children are more children whether they are conceived naturally or through ivf. From a population growth perspective either they are both wrong or they are both right.

I don't have a problem with a couple who intend to raise their baby together and take parental responsibility, and who pay for it themselves, doing IVF.

I completely disagree with egg and sperm donation - it's cruel to deliberately bring a child into the world while depriving it of its biological parents. This clearly puts the feelings of adults over the wellbeing of the child.

I completely disagree with surrogacy - human beings have inherent dignity, they should never be bought and sold.

I also don't believe that the NHS should pay for IVF cycles. This country can't even provide adequate dental care, mental health support and even urgent operations for the people that are currently here, so it seems madness to fund the making of extra people - especially as IVF children are more likely to have health issues. In my opinion it falls under the same sort of area as cosmetic surgery - yes providing it would improve the mental health of many people, but it can't be prioritised while the system is under such strain.

Another thought on the topic - I know somebody who donated sperm. I'm sure on paper he looked absolutely great but if you were to meet him in person you would definitely notice that something was "off". He's suffered from two serious mental health issues that I know of since donating - picking a stranger from a catalogue to be the father of your children really doesn't give you enough information!

Plus most couples using IVF are most likely to have one, two children at the most if successful.

You'd have to compare with babies conceived naturally to the same parents at the same time, though, surely? To account for age and the other problems. Ie it's not the IVF process per se that is linked to issues.

The whole thing is fascinating. And i agree with pp we are so fixated on alleviating suffering of any kind perhaps we don't always see the bigger picture. I don't know.