Brangelina twins were from IVF????

[WendyWeber]

Not the most reliable of sources mind you

I don't know how thinly she can spread herself as a mother. I know some families have 6 children, but they are all more spread out in age, and the family has grown at a slower rate. Wham bam, 6 children.... HOW much time and attention can she give them?

And Brad Pitt has gone from being the father of no kids to the father of 6 kids in about 3 yrs? That has got to be an identity crisis waiting to happen.

So I don't like them, big deal. No need to get your knickers in a twist because I dare to voice my humble opinion.

This isn't a dictatorship - yet.

"They have two chances of conceiving-naturally and via IVF" - whoever said that (apologies I can't remember) doesn't understand IVF - once you are embarked on IVF (in a particular cycle) you can't try naturally as well - the first drugs you take put you into instant menopause and are taken for a little while (obviously can't get pregnant then) then you take drugs to grow your eggs but they do not "ripen" until you give yourself a trigger injection at which point they ned to be collected either undersedation or GA within 24 hours. A good cycle is mindnumbingly stressful and emotional. A bad cycle, where you have to give yourself intramuscular injections into your bum (or worse leg), where you hyperstimuate and produce 30+ eggs and swwell up like a barrage balloon and are nearly hospitalised, where you haemorage immediately after embryo transfer or your eggs just fail to be fertilised for reasons no one knows, well thats a little worse.

Oh its a joy.

Anyone who goes through this possibly repeatedly for whatever reason earned their children dearly. Success rates are not significantly better based on whether you are fertile or not but what the quality of your eggs are like.

"She has made a mockery of genuine adoptive parenting", you think? Was the adoption of your children a test-book example of how an adoption should be done then? Do share.

Jeez but you are all getting very worked up about a pair of celebrities.

Tell you what, if you don't want people to post their opinions then write a little subtext to the thread saying "only people with x views are allowed to post here."

So very glad I am not self-righteous, that pedestal would send my head woozy it is so high up.

no no I am very interested in your opinions... I hadn't taken you for such a active supporter of adoption (given you've never posted on the subject before). I;m always happy to discuss what should be done to place more children in family homes which is our responsibilty under the Hague convention on the rights of children but which you obviously disagree with.

so do you think that childrne of differnet nationalities shouldn't be allowed to be adopted as siblings?

I read a similar article in the Italian media and was a bit upset by the implication that getting pregnant with IVF is somewhat easier than conceiving naturally. I have quite a few couple of friends who had to go through the stress of IVF, and it's been a very stressing experience both physically and emotionally for them. So I found the article offensive.

As for the brangelinas, I really couldn't care much about how they reproduce.

I've never posted on adoption before, I didn't realise it was necessary for this thread. You will excuse but I am very touchy at the moment for other reasons.

On adoption I think you obviously know more but surely what matters are the parents - I think the system is, from what I have heard (ex-BIL) very ageist etc. If I had extra rooms I would seriously consider fostering as my aunt did this for many years, and foster disabled children. Child welfare is important more than why the parents are doing x, y or z.

I have heard, on certain programmes, that white parents shouldn't adopt a black children and vica versa but that seems so unfair.

My problem with Brangelina is that they seem to be more into collecting these children than offering them a loving household. Money does not make a loving household alone. Surely having so many children so quickly can't be good for letting an adopted child find their place in a family? I can question their motives because they are celebs and out there for people to debate against.

This post is a bit all over-the-place as it is late and time for bed.

franca its on a par with teh casual articles you read saying that career women (said with a slightly curledlip) can now choose to have teir eggs frozen and have their childrne when they are 120 so as not to damage their career. Yes becasue freezing eggs is sooooo successful - in fact its usually a desparate attempt to retain some fertility if you are having treatment for cancer.

Surely career women shouldn't be allowed to have children kewcumber, you know that ????

your BIL is commenting on the UK system. US system is much quicker and generally fairly colour-blind regardless of celebrity.

WHtehr they should have had the childrne so quickly is a differnet argument and a valid one to debate - that they chose them for their looks is not. I don;t know much about the earlier adoption but the last one was a blind referral in common with most overseas adoption. Angelina did not "choose".

"they seem to be more into collecting these children than offering them a loving household" - you have no basis for this other than that you appear to dislike them. hey succefully completely a home study each time with a coial worker who's job is to protect the rights on the child.

Of course you are entitled to your opinion just as I am entitled to comment that it is an uninformed one.

I do have issues with an aspect of their adoptions, interestingly it is never one that non-adopters raise.

Should career women resign while they wait for somebody to fertilise their eggs?!

aorry that should read "I do have an issue with an aspect of their adoptions, interestingly it is never one that non-adopters raise"

I have always wondered what separates "career women" from thsoe tht merely have jobs and are obviously a lesser sub-species.

What aspect is that Kew?

whats the issue kew? im curious

Yes, kew, I used to think that as I trudged into work every day for 12 yrs before I had kids.

i am the lesser sub species, me. none of my jobs would ever have been described as a 'career'. not by me or anyone else!

ho hum!

blimey that last long post of mine read like English wasn't even my second language but a distant third!

career women are terribly clever and well behaved people who Achieve Stuff and Wear Good Shoes

ah but if I told you then I wouldn't have a failsafe way of sniffing out the adopters/knowledgable (and therefore to be taken seriously) from the merely opinionated (and therefore ignorable)

no it didnt kew, it read like you typed in a hurry. mine all look like that

which aspect?

career women wear chanel suits and wave effortlessly to taxis that actually stop.

Yes suits from Hobbs and Karen Millen.

ah
but i am neither.
i am not an adopter and so i have an open mind and dont for one minute think i know the first thing about it! in fact, YOU are the person id ask if i had any questions as it happens