If you’re someone who thinks sex selection with IVF is a bad idea…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You take whatever the good lord gives you. And you are grateful. And I'm not even religious.

(op, your "ideal" spacing comment was a little hard to take)

Agreed!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You take whatever the good lord gives you. And you are grateful. And I'm not even religious.

(op, your "ideal" spacing comment was a little hard to take)

Agreed!

I kind of feel this way too, which is weird because I am very pro-gender selection if it means, for example, you have 4 boys and get a girl vs having 8 miserable boys. Or anything genetically related. One of each already and for a third kid? I'd just go with the healthiest embryo, I think most would.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You take whatever the good lord gives you. And you are grateful. And I'm not even religious.

(op, your "ideal" spacing comment was a little hard to take)

If you’re taking whatever the good lord gives you…that’s not IVF anyway!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You take whatever the good lord gives you. And you are grateful. And I'm not even religious.

(op, your "ideal" spacing comment was a little hard to take)

If you’re taking whatever the good lord gives you…that’s not IVF anyway!

This! Once you’re doing IVF anyway why are you not allowed to have any other benefits of technology?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a private matter and no one's business. I just don't want to hear you whine about how you didn't get what you wanted or how hard it is to have this combo, vs that combo when you chose and were able to carry a healthy living pregnancy to term and being home a living baby.

Why do you bring your dead baby drama into every single post?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You take whatever the good lord gives you. And you are grateful. And I'm not even religious.

(op, your "ideal" spacing comment was a little hard to take)

If you’re taking whatever the good lord gives you…that’s not IVF anyway!

This! Once you’re doing IVF anyway why are you not allowed to have any other benefits of technology?

Yeah, I don't understand all this hand-wringing re: "playing god" or whatever. According to this logic, any kind of medical intervention = "playing god." Especially IVF, which is used to prolong/promote fertility beyond the point "nature" has determined is ideal (not saying I agree with this characterization, obviously). And where PGT is involved, parents are already selecting for "healthy" embryos - not just those without life-threatening mutations. How is selecting for gender any different? Just like health/disability, sex is hugely consequential to how individuals experience the world.

Relatedly, I don't understand the view that it's only acceptable to choose when there's a sex-linked genetic condition. I have a boy who I love completely and I wouldn't change a single thing about, for instance, but I can think of plenty of perfectly valid, non-medical reasons one might prefer a girl. E.g., boys are nearly 4 times more likely to be diagnosed with autism and 3 times more likely to be diagnosed with ADHD. Historically and presently, women have been more likely to take on the burden of eldercare. Men are responsible for wildly disproportionate amounts of violence and aggression, and there's only so much parenting can overcome. Of course, there are plenty of challenges/potential downsides involved in raising girls as well. But it should be up to individual parents to weigh what matters most to them and make that decision.

Frankly, there aren't enough people doing IVF with PGT that allowing for selection will make a meaningful difference on a population level. And if we ever get to that point, banning sex selection isn't the answer. Instead, we should try to address the underlying reasons for the preference (e.g., in the case of girl-preference, some of the ones listed above).

On a personal note, I am a donor-conceived individual, which in my view is a WAY more ethically dubious practice (I say this without judgment towards those who pursue it - my judgment is reserved from the highly corrupt, unregulated, and profitable fertility industry). And yet, I almost never see comments (on these forums or in general) questioning that practice. In the donor conception context, recipient parents frequently select for race, height, hair color, intelligence, etc.

[Anonymous]

I think girls of that age difference would be much more likely to fight. I am very unfortunatley well educated on this. There would be much more continuity as a family also with a girl in the middle would be my guess.
but it's all a guess. my point is, your assumptions are very shaky.

[Anonymous]

OP, I asked this question to my RE. He said, “either you can pick or someone in the embryology lab can.” That sealed it for me when it came to picking one of my embryos, which were equally highly graded. If I had to go through the grind of IVF, with all that uncertainty, why should I not get to have one measure of choice?

I didn’t pick my first (fresh embryo transfer, untested). I did pick my second. I have two amazing girls. I won’t judge you. Also, you probably won’t think about this dilemma ever again after you’re pregnant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You take whatever the good lord gives you. And you are grateful. And I'm not even religious.

(op, your "ideal" spacing comment was a little hard to take)

If you’re taking whatever the good lord gives you…that’s not IVF anyway!

This! Once you’re doing IVF anyway why are you not allowed to have any other benefits of technology?

Yeah, I don't understand all this hand-wringing re: "playing god" or whatever. According to this logic, any kind of medical intervention = "playing god." Especially IVF, which is used to prolong/promote fertility beyond the point "nature" has determined is ideal (not saying I agree with this characterization, obviously). And where PGT is involved, parents are already selecting for "healthy" embryos - not just those without life-threatening mutations. How is selecting for gender any different? Just like health/disability, sex is hugely consequential to how individuals experience the world.

Relatedly, I don't understand the view that it's only acceptable to choose when there's a sex-linked genetic condition. I have a boy who I love completely and I wouldn't change a single thing about, for instance, but I can think of plenty of perfectly valid, non-medical reasons one might prefer a girl. E.g., boys are nearly 4 times more likely to be diagnosed with autism and 3 times more likely to be diagnosed with ADHD. Historically and presently, women have been more likely to take on the burden of eldercare. Men are responsible for wildly disproportionate amounts of violence and aggression, and there's only so much parenting can overcome. Of course, there are plenty of challenges/potential downsides involved in raising girls as well. But it should be up to individual parents to weigh what matters most to them and make that decision.

Frankly, there aren't enough people doing IVF with PGT that allowing for selection will make a meaningful difference on a population level. And if we ever get to that point, banning sex selection isn't the answer. Instead, we should try to address the underlying reasons for the preference (e.g., in the case of girl-preference, some of the ones listed above).

On a personal note, I am a donor-conceived individual, which in my view is a WAY more ethically dubious practice (I say this without judgment towards those who pursue it - my judgment is reserved from the highly corrupt, unregulated, and profitable fertility industry). And yet, I almost never see comments (on these forums or in general) questioning that practice. In the donor conception context, recipient parents frequently select for race, height, hair color, intelligence, etc.

+1. You said this so well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You take whatever the good lord gives you. And you are grateful. And I'm not even religious.

(op, your "ideal" spacing comment was a little hard to take)

If you’re taking whatever the good lord gives you…that’s not IVF anyway!

This! Once you’re doing IVF anyway why are you not allowed to have any other benefits of technology?

Yeah, I don't understand all this hand-wringing re: "playing god" or whatever. According to this logic, any kind of medical intervention = "playing god." Especially IVF, which is used to prolong/promote fertility beyond the point "nature" has determined is ideal (not saying I agree with this characterization, obviously). And where PGT is involved, parents are already selecting for "healthy" embryos - not just those without life-threatening mutations. How is selecting for gender any different? Just like health/disability, sex is hugely consequential to how individuals experience the world.

Relatedly, I don't understand the view that it's only acceptable to choose when there's a sex-linked genetic condition. I have a boy who I love completely and I wouldn't change a single thing about, for instance, but I can think of plenty of perfectly valid, non-medical reasons one might prefer a girl. E.g., boys are nearly 4 times more likely to be diagnosed with autism and 3 times more likely to be diagnosed with ADHD. Historically and presently, women have been more likely to take on the burden of eldercare. Men are responsible for wildly disproportionate amounts of violence and aggression, and there's only so much parenting can overcome. Of course, there are plenty of challenges/potential downsides involved in raising girls as well. But it should be up to individual parents to weigh what matters most to them and make that decision.

Frankly, there aren't enough people doing IVF with PGT that allowing for selection will make a meaningful difference on a population level. And if we ever get to that point, banning sex selection isn't the answer. Instead, we should try to address the underlying reasons for the preference (e.g., in the case of girl-preference, some of the ones listed above).

On a personal note, I am a donor-conceived individual, which in my view is a WAY more ethically dubious practice (I say this without judgment towards those who pursue it - my judgment is reserved from the highly corrupt, unregulated, and profitable fertility industry). And yet, I almost never see comments (on these forums or in general) questioning that practice. In the donor conception context, recipient parents frequently select for race, height, hair color, intelligence, etc.

If you are pro-choice, you really cannot oppose sex-selection without being a hypocrite and total fraud.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You take whatever the good lord gives you. And you are grateful. And I'm not even religious.

(op, your "ideal" spacing comment was a little hard to take)

If you’re taking whatever the good lord gives you…that’s not IVF anyway!

This! Once you’re doing IVF anyway why are you not allowed to have any other benefits of technology?

Yeah, I don't understand all this hand-wringing re: "playing god" or whatever. According to this logic, any kind of medical intervention = "playing god." Especially IVF, which is used to prolong/promote fertility beyond the point "nature" has determined is ideal (not saying I agree with this characterization, obviously). And where PGT is involved, parents are already selecting for "healthy" embryos - not just those without life-threatening mutations. How is selecting for gender any different? Just like health/disability, sex is hugely consequential to how individuals experience the world.

Relatedly, I don't understand the view that it's only acceptable to choose when there's a sex-linked genetic condition. I have a boy who I love completely and I wouldn't change a single thing about, for instance, but I can think of plenty of perfectly valid, non-medical reasons one might prefer a girl. E.g., boys are nearly 4 times more likely to be diagnosed with autism and 3 times more likely to be diagnosed with ADHD. Historically and presently, women have been more likely to take on the burden of eldercare. Men are responsible for wildly disproportionate amounts of violence and aggression, and there's only so much parenting can overcome. Of course, there are plenty of challenges/potential downsides involved in raising girls as well. But it should be up to individual parents to weigh what matters most to them and make that decision.

Frankly, there aren't enough people doing IVF with PGT that allowing for selection will make a meaningful difference on a population level. And if we ever get to that point, banning sex selection isn't the answer. Instead, we should try to address the underlying reasons for the preference (e.g., in the case of girl-preference, some of the ones listed above).

On a personal note, I am a donor-conceived individual, which in my view is a WAY more ethically dubious practice (I say this without judgment towards those who pursue it - my judgment is reserved from the highly corrupt, unregulated, and profitable fertility industry). And yet, I almost never see comments (on these forums or in general) questioning that practice. In the donor conception context, recipient parents frequently select for race, height, hair color, intelligence, etc.

Agree 1000% and with the PP who said once you're doing IVF, why shouldn't you get all of available benefits.

[Anonymous]

I think if you have to go through the process of IVF you should be able to have a little extra benefit of being able to pick the sex, which is something that people who can conceive easily and without payment don't get.

[Anonymous]

Choose a girl, lower rates of autism.

[Anonymous]

I don't have an opinion on sex selection, but I do have an opinion on boys being 5.5 years apart, since that's what I have. (No sibling in between them). My boys always played well together, and they continue to be pretty close at 21 and 26.

[Anonymous]

I think there is a lot of lack of control in all this, and personally I would pick the highest graded embryo that has the best chance of implantation. If you are lucky enough to generate multiple embryos that are equally high quality, then gender could be considered, but that’s a lot of ifs.

Know of many people who after retrieval and fertilization only have a small number of viable embryos (like the 1-3 range). It’s not so easy to have everything according to plan.