To ask if people today don’t agree with ivf?!

[Yaerry]

or am I just naive? Watched the new documentary about Jean Purdy and I’m surprised there was so much push back at the time. It’s made me wonder if one day surrogacy will be more accepted? I thought ivf was just a standard thing now that wasn’t controversial.

Re - ‘discarded’ embryos. I was incredibly lucky and had plenty of successfully fertilised eggs and they froze the embryos as I hoped further down the line to have another.

Sadly my husband had different ideas and left post-affair. Using those embryos therefore wasn’t an option and they were donated to medical science. Heart breaking for me at the time but I feel incredibly lucky to have my son.

And hopefully those embryos will go towards helping research in some other area of medicine / to treat life threatening diseases affecting everyone - both pro and anti IVF!!

I am a Catholic. I had one round of IVF on the nhs due to medical issues with my husband and am so thankful that it was successful ( my eggs/ husbands sperm). Those saying you dont agree with it on the nhs are of course entitled to your opinion, but unless you've been there....
infertility was out of my control.

It is unconscionable to remove a newborn infant from its biological mother (unless said mother is incapable of providing a safe and loving home).

If by biological mother you mean the woman who provided the egg and is genetically related to the child, then in many, if not most, cases of surrogacy the birth mother is not the biological mother of the child. She carries a child that she is not related to. Even in surrogacy for gay couples, the egg donor and the birth mother are different people.

I know several women who having carried multiple children of their own have volunteered to carry a child for someone else, who have been unable to carry a baby to term themselves. None of them considered they were giving up their own baby.

I know the law in many countries treats the birth mother as the legal mother even if she is not genetically linked, but I wanted to point behind the biology to be clear.

Medical science isn't far off being able to make egg cells from any cell. So a 90 year women could create a viable egg.

When I say woman, it's actually possible for any human.

I don’t agree with IVF if it involves egg and sperm donation, but other than that, I think it’s ok.

Surrogacy is the renting of women and their wombs and purchasing of babies which is extremely unethical. It should be banned everywhere imo.

I don't agree with surrogacy - there are biological reasons why it's devastating for a baby to be ripped away from birth mother.

For IVF I have concerns, nothing religious more aboth the ethics of it. Many children born through IVF deal with medical issues whether that's physical or mental. How do we decide what embryos to use without boarding on eugenics but avoiding unnecessary harm to children knowing they may deal with difficulties as a result? There's also issues with the use of donors and the ethics of it.

And yet how amazing is it people who wouldn't otherwise are able to have children!? I think it is an incredible breakthrough that needs much more oversight and regulations.

I am against IVF with donor eggs or sperm. Just look up Laura High on TikTok.

I don’t think I would ever do it myself, as we really don’t know much about the long term impact of it (less than 50 years is nothing) and it is so punishing on the mother.

But in general not against the principle of IVF…IVF on the NHS is a tricky one.

Regarding IVF, there are ethical issues when it comes to sperm and especially egg donation. I don't think it happens in Britain, but in some countries young women are really exploited as egg donors. But IVF using the gametes of both parents is not in itself an ethically troubling issue. Whether it should be funded by the NHS is another question, but not really relevant here.

Surrogacy is a different matter entirely. It involves 'renting out' a woman's body for 9 months and then taking a tiny baby away from its only source of comfort. Even 'altruistic' surrogacy is wide open to coercion and all sorts of other ethical problems. 'Commercial' surrogacy is simply horrifying. Handmaid's tale stuff.

Personally I think surrogacy should be banned in all its forms, as it is in most European countries.

Your friend clearly being part of the problem does not excuse your use of dehumanising language.

This is a disgusting and hurtful post. Of course there isn't "always something wrong" with IVF children, you surely can't actually believe that.

I'm sorry but I find your comment abhorrent. Natures way of controling population increase? That's disgusting. My husband survived cancer, hence our need for IVF. Should he have died to save population control? Should my DD not exist now because well really he should be dead, so she shouldn't have even be a thing in the first place?

Glad you have your natural child. I hope to god one day she doesn't need IVF

I egg shared for my first two cycles of IVF. I know there is a male child born in 2009 out there somewhere.

At no point was I coerced or persuaded to do so. I would CHOOSE to do it all over again in a heartbeat.

We can talk til the cows come home about how a child is conceived having an impact. I mean, my friend conceived in a shrub on our Travel & Tourism residential trip to Majorca when she was 17 with the help of a man she'd never met. Is that preferable to a loving couple, desperate to love a child accepting my eggs to use?

@Nn9011 What evidence do you have that many children born from ivf have physical and mental problems?

There have been 12 million ivf children. I find it very hard to believe that even a significant minority have health problems. We've had ivf for almost 50 years now and lots of ivf children will have their own children.

I don't have an issue with IVF, as a treatment for infertility (pre menopause) . I disagree with it being used for women in their 60s or 70s (rare but it has happened)

I disagree with surrogacy, and don't see it as the same thing.

Did you just say that in your out loud voice? Do realise that you pressed “post” and we can all read that now?

If there was a link between IVF and cancer then I dare say we'd know about it seeing as tens of millions of women have had IVF. The two women you knew who died from cancer who also had IVF are just coincidences, would you be concerned their cancer was caused by any other medical treatment they'd both happened to have?

The difference with surrogacy is that someone else’s body is being used to create a baby for the benefit of someone else. Its womb hiring. With IVF that’s not the case.

I have Joy on my Netflix watch list about the birth of IVF I’ll be looking forward to watching that

Please do be aware though that medical issues are often nowhere near as prevalent as they seem with IVF / ICSI births. For example, reports often state the risk of serious heart defects is 36% higher, but actually this is a rise from 1.15% to 1.84% so a fraction of a per cent. I only raise this as I was an extremely anxious IVF mum to be, who worried endlessly about things like this so did a lot of research both online and questioning the various consultants and embryologists.

WTAF

You do understand that getting egg and sperm to mix can be part of the problem. Some women have blocked tubes due to illness/ infection. Some men have low sperm count due to childhood illness.

Hope you aren't going to get antibiotics next time you are ill, you don't want to mess with natures population control

Have you ever struggled with infertility?

Clearly they haven’t, and I bet that their shit doesn’t stink either.

For every successful IVF pregnancy and new baby, that child's siblings remain frozen until a future round of IVF, discarded, or used in embryo experimentation. An embryo is an individual human life, and is treated as a product, therefore ethically wrong -the ends never justify the means.

They don't. That poster is talking out of her very offensive arse.