If I ever am faced with this issue, I will adopt instead.

Don't a lot of embryos fertilized the normal way also fail to successfully implant? What difference does IVF make in that case?

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

If I ever am faced with this issue, I will adopt instead.

---

Targeting certain times of the month for "relations" (a la fertility awareness) often aids a couple in conceiving within 6 months to a year.

Rocag said:

---

Don't a lot of embryos fertilized the normal way also fail to successfully implant? What difference does IVF make in that case?

---

Well, yeah, the end result is the same. But the difference lies in the means or the actions/intentions that lead to the destruction of the embryo.

The intent of IVF is for the woman to get pregnant. That's kind of the entire purpose of the procedure.

Rocag said:

---

Don't a lot of embryos fertilized the normal way also fail to successfully implant? What difference does IVF make in that case?

---

Precisely because it's not "normal." It's not the natural and God appointed means of having children. Any death as a result of it is not a "natural" death. Obviously it doesn't carry the same culpability as abortion or discarding fertilized embryos, but people should be encouraged to think through the ethics before proceeding.

Rocag said:

---

The intent of IVF is for the woman to get pregnant. That's kind of the entire purpose of the procedure.

---

But the means of doing so...

747Ag said:

---

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

If I ever am faced with this issue, I will adopt instead.

---

Targeting certain times of the month for "relations" (a la fertility awareness) often aids a couple in conceiving within 6 months to a year.

---

I do understand how making a baby works.

Unused fertilized embryos can be adopted. That is the correct course of action if extra embryos are created.

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

747Ag said:

---

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

If I ever am faced with this issue, I will adopt instead.

---

Targeting certain times of the month for "relations" (a la fertility awareness) often aids a couple in conceiving within 6 months to a year.

---

I do understand how making a baby works.

---

The comment wasn't so much about that, but that some people believe themselves to be infertile without being deliberate about timing. I've run across such people.

AstroAg17 said:

---

Aggie4Life02 said:

---

Unused fertilized embryos can be adopted. That is the correct course of action if extra embryos are created.

---

Who is going to carry them?

---

The women who have them implanted in their uterus.

AstroAg17 said:

---

Unused embryos here refers to "extras", which were prepared but not implanted in the female. They don't make them one at a time. They make a batch, they implant some, they wait, and if the woman gets pregnant then they either store the unused embryos or destroy them. So they are not in a female, and are probably not very good candidates for adoption.

---

Embryos are adopted all the time, so you are uninformed.

Say both parents are fertile, but the boys aren't strong swimmers. Ivf puts egg and sperm together, then implants.

The Bible talks about raisin cakes for fertility purposes (sexual relations). It seems things tend to be okie dokie, as long as it's done in the confines of a one-flesh (complementarian) marriage.

There is no ethical problem with IVF, but there can be ethical problems with how it is done. If you create dozens of embryos, trash the ones you don't use, impant a half dozen, and then terminate the extras in the womb, then you have huge ethical issues are every step. There is no law that you have to do IVF as mass production.

You could create a few embryos at a time until you have enough viable embryos and implant all of them. If the couple is happy with the idea of possible triplets, then you make embryos until you hit 3 viable, implant them all, and accept the outcome of 0-3 children.

Of course this takes longer, costs more, and has a lower chance of pregnancy. However, if you were very faithful and pro-life, then you could do IVF without wanton destruction of life or hoping someone else will take responsibility for your unwanted embryos

I never had any concerns with the morality of IVF.

I'm not trying to be pushy or rude, but you don't know much at all about IVF based on your comments.


Ok guys, quick one for you...

Genetic medical condition can be overcome through selection of non-affected embryos and implantation via IVF.

Multiple embryos are created, all are tested, all are frozen. When test results come back 8/10 have genetic condition which can be fatal in utero, as a baby, child, up to puberty, if not fatal can lead to severe learning disabilities and/or physical and mental deformation issues... condition does NOT have to be bad though, some people can live perfectly happy normal lives, seemingly completely unaffected by disorder.

So what is everyone's thoughts on the 8 affect embryos? There is no ability to discern how "healthy" they would be, or if they would even end up as a successful pregnancy.

I do understand that babies spontaneously abort frequently, especially with increasing parental age (yes, sperm age as well). However, IVF embryos are especially prone to abortion. The freezing process and the implantation process often damage the embryo - that's why multiple embryos are typically implanted at a time.
Given all of this, I have struggled with my feelings about IVF. I feel that, if the parents are married and are trying to procreate but just need a little extra help from science, and if they are willing to implant all viable embryos, there is little harm done morally. However, in a very significant number of cases, IVF clinics are matching sperm and egg from males and females who are not bonded by matrimony. And contrary to the beliefs of a previous poster, the unimplanted embryos are rarely adopted.

My sister-in-law decided to go this route in her early 40s. She had frozen her eggs in her 30s, and then had found a sperm donor who had agreed to be a father were the IVF to be a success. They had a legal agreement written up, etc. I am pretty sure that everybody in the family knew how I felt about this, but I made sure to keep my mouth shut. Unfortunately, she conceived but spontaneously aborted at about the third month. Really, I wish she had just decided to adopt, and if the sperm donor was as excited about being a father as she was, why wouldn't the both of them be just as excited about the prospect of an adoption? I would have supported it wholeheartedly, as opposed to the route they chose to take. I had even told my wife that I would pay all of the adoption costs for her sister if she decided to go this route, either with the guy who wanted to be a sperm donor or if she decided to go it alone.

In the end, I think that IVF is very often about hubris - MY sperm and MY egg are superior to anything out there, so if nature isn't cooperating I will just look to science. I fully understand that there are those who will find offense with my thought process on this. Infertility can be a tremendous burden on couples.

I'll let my son know that he's the product of hubris.

I feel strongly about the issue because I lived it. I married late in life to a woman a year older than I. She was hearing her biological clock ticking and was extremely worried. She wanted to do IVF and I was against it at first. I grappled with it for a long time as the clock ticked. Finally, we decided we would give it a try under one condition - that we would implant any viable embryos and we would not use donor eggs. Long story short, we went 0-fer. In the process, my wife had significant issues with the hormones which were given, and with the procedure for egg retrieval. She is now adamantly against IVF. We started an adoption process, and were matched with a child about the time that she became pregnant. We offered to have a natural child and adopt the child we were matched with, but the particular agency we were going through had as their mission statement that they would ONLY match children to childless couples.

In my sister-in law's case, her IVF was a complete disaster. She conceived, then had hyperemesis gravida and lost the pregnancy. She had a D&C that went poorly, had a postoperative hemorrhage, had to return to the OR and have a repeat procedure followed by a 3-unit transfusion. Everyone knew that I was against her IVF all along, and I was the only man in town during her hospital stay (the sperm donor was from out of state, she was unmarried, and only my wife and another sister and their Mother were in town). I just sat on her hospital bed and stroked her hair without saying a word - it was all I could do.

As I said in my post, if a married couple needs a little help from science, I think that's OK. I think the IVF industry, as a whole, is a rather amoral bunch and they often can't and don't deliver on their promises. The NICUs of the world are evidence of such.

Welp, now it was made personal.

I'm not trying to get personal, but it sounds like your wife is only against IVF because of a bad experience, not because of any immoral or personal disagreement reasons.

That it and of itself is different than being against morally or religiously.

No, for both of us, our change in views have migrated for several reasons. We both feel that, by and large, the IVF industry is fairly morally bereft. I am not the same person I was 12 years ago, and neither is she. Some of our changing opinions are due to experience, some are due to thought and study, prayer and contemplation. I do NOT wish to insult someone who is acting within his or her moral beliefs, properly formed and examined and cross-tested, when it comes to the decision as to whether to use or not use IVF. And, of course, the child created, or created and then destroyed, NEVER bears any responsibility or shame. But the creation and destruction of life are huge issues that demand serious thought, and I personally see the IVF industry as akin to the nuclear industry - it can be used for good and it can be seriously misused. Lastly, I wish to thank the above poster for pointing out that I very intentionally said "very often", but I wish he had not added the latter statement as it was not my intention to throw the Apple of Discord out here or to insult anyone. I sincerely appreciate an anonymous forum in which to discuss what I deem to be a serious ethical issue.

Do you mind if I ask what religion you are?

Not at all. But I suppose you already know.
Roman Catholic.

I didn't, but that would have been my guess.

Isn't and hasn't IVF always been considered against Catholic teachings/"rules"/guidance?