What will happen with IVF if abortion rights are restricted?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op here - I don’t have a dog in this fight. I had 3 kids without using IVF but would be curious to hear what pro-lifers say about the use of science and technology to conceive and when a “life” starts.

Also men participate in natural conception too but that hasn’t seemed to stop them from putting restrictions on pro-choice rights.

No one is trying to restrict rights to natural conception. They’re only trying to restrict a woman’s right to decide not to gestate — something men can’t do.

But the argument for pro-lifers is literally that life begins at conception. Therefore an embryo made during IVF is a person and cannot just be discarded. I.E you must implant no matter what. Or face consequences.

Exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op here - I don’t have a dog in this fight. I had 3 kids without using IVF but would be curious to hear what pro-lifers say about the use of science and technology to conceive and when a “life” starts.

Also men participate in natural conception too but that hasn’t seemed to stop them from putting restrictions on pro-choice rights.

No one is trying to restrict rights to natural conception. They’re only trying to restrict a woman’s right to decide not to gestate — something men can’t do.

But the argument for pro-lifers is literally that life begins at conception. Therefore an embryo made during IVF is a person and cannot just be discarded. I.E you must implant no matter what. Or face consequences.

Exactly.

You mean you must transfer the embryos to the uterus or face consequences. Science hasn’t advanced to the point where we can make embryos implant. That’s still up to Mother Nature.

I wonder whether there would be consequences for embryos with chromosomal abnormalities, whose development arrests before they can even be transferred or frozen.

[Anonymous]

This is a worrying issue, I agree OP.

It never made any sense to me that pro lifers are so worked up about abortion but never seem concerned about all the embryos that get destroyed each year. Makes you wonder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a worrying issue, I agree OP.

It never made any sense to me that pro lifers are so worked up about abortion but never seem concerned about all the embryos that get destroyed each year. Makes you wonder.

I don't really wonder. It's not about life. It's about controlling women. IVF embryos aren't inside a woman

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op here - I don’t have a dog in this fight. I had 3 kids without using IVF but would be curious to hear what pro-lifers say about the use of science and technology to conceive and when a “life” starts.

Also men participate in natural conception too but that hasn’t seemed to stop them from putting restrictions on pro-choice rights.

No one is trying to restrict rights to natural conception. They’re only trying to restrict a woman’s right to decide not to gestate — something men can’t do.

But the argument for pro-lifers is literally that life begins at conception. Therefore an embryo made during IVF is a person and cannot just be discarded. I.E you must implant no matter what. Or face consequences.

Exactly.

You mean you must transfer the embryos to the uterus or face consequences. Science hasn’t advanced to the point where we can make embryos implant. That’s still up to Mother Nature.

I wonder whether there would be consequences for embryos with chromosomal abnormalities, whose development arrests before they can even be transferred or frozen.

Why would there be? This is not a reason (under this thinking) that you can voluntarily abort. Every embryo must be carried to term if physically possible.

[Anonymous]

PS: I mean, developing abnormally or not at all is not a reason to abort, for this position.

[Anonymous]

Already a thread in the infertility forum:

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1018556.page

[Anonymous]

It's all going to be on the table, and ACB already is on record for being against IVF for the reason of discarded embryos. The current talk of 15 weeks, 6, 9 or heartbeat isn't the point. They want to control everything including certain types of birth control.

[Anonymous]

Nah, nothing will happen with IVF. Outlawing abortion is about shaming women for having sex or trying to prevent them from having sex or trying to return to a society where young single moms were vilified. Anti-abortion people do not care about rich professional couples creating zillions of embryos and destroying them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's all going to be on the table, and ACB already is on record for being against IVF for the reason of discarded embryos. The current talk of 15 weeks, 6, 9 or heartbeat isn't the point. They want to control everything including certain types of birth control.

OP here - Since the court is packed they should go for the gold! Make IVF illegal/abortion illegal/birth control illegal and see what happens. That is what conservative GOPers want right?

[Anonymous]

No one will come after IVF because it is mostly used by rich, white women.

Pro-life is not about saving embryos and fetuses - if it was, pro-lifers would support comprehensive sex-Ed, affordable birth control, and a strong social safety net for single mothers.

Pro-life and abortion access are about controlling the bodies and choices of mostly poor and non-white women. We wouldn’t want to many of them to get educated, break the cycle of poverty, and G-d forbid vote. Who would clean our houses or watch our kids for $10/hr?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nah, nothing will happen with IVF. Outlawing abortion is about shaming women for having sex or trying to prevent them from having sex or trying to return to a society where young single moms were vilified. Anti-abortion people do not care about rich professional couples creating zillions of embryos and destroying them.

Ill push for it personally if abortion is restricted. Goose gander.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one will come after IVF because it is mostly used by rich, white women.

Pro-life is not about saving embryos and fetuses - if it was, pro-lifers would support comprehensive sex-Ed, affordable birth control, and a strong social safety net for single mothers.

Pro-life and abortion access are about controlling the bodies and choices of mostly poor and non-white women. We wouldn’t want to many of them to get educated, break the cycle of poverty, and G-d forbid vote. Who would clean our houses or watch our kids for $10/hr?

Exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nah, nothing will happen with IVF. Outlawing abortion is about shaming women for having sex or trying to prevent them from having sex or trying to return to a society where young single moms were vilified. Anti-abortion people do not care about rich professional couples creating zillions of embryos and destroying them.

Ill push for it personally if abortion is restricted. Goose gander.

+1 - totally agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's all going to be on the table, and ACB already is on record for being against IVF for the reason of discarded embryos. The current talk of 15 weeks, 6, 9 or heartbeat isn't the point. They want to control everything including certain types of birth control.

I hate this frickin’ Aunt Lydia.