NY Times article on twins and infertility

[Anonymous]

GET OUT OF HERE POSTER 15:21!! AGAIN, THIS IS A FORUM FOR SUPPORT NOT A FORUM TO QUESTION FERTILITY, INFERTILITY, TREATMENTS, DRUGS, DONOR EGGS, DONOR SPERM ETC. YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO QUESTION BUT THIS IS THE WRONG FORUM TO DO SO. WHAT YOU ARE DOING IS INDEED CAUSING HARM SO FIND ANOTHER FORUM WHERE YOU CAN QUESTION EVERYTHING UNDER THE SUN. FWIW, LIFE COMES ONLY WITH RISKS AND NO GUARANTEES.

[Anonymous]

a double bird goes to all the judgmental ladies who look down upon fertility treatments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:GET OUT OF HERE POSTER 15:21!! AGAIN, THIS IS A FORUM FOR SUPPORT NOT A FORUM TO QUESTION FERTILITY, INFERTILITY, TREATMENTS, DRUGS, DONOR EGGS, DONOR SPERM ETC. YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO QUESTION BUT THIS IS THE WRONG FORUM TO DO SO. WHAT YOU ARE DOING IS INDEED CAUSING HARM SO FIND ANOTHER FORUM WHERE YOU CAN QUESTION EVERYTHING UNDER THE SUN. FWIW, LIFE COMES ONLY WITH RISKS AND NO GUARANTEES.

I second that. As if adoption is totally risk free. Ridiculous. Do what's right for your family and if you're a nervous nellie, so be it. but please don't rain on this parade.

[Anonymous]

Mom of two "biotech" kids here. Have to get off of DCUM now because I have to go plug them in; they have to be charged every night in order to work right during the day. Oh, and you probably know me. I'm the mom at the playground whose kids radiate florescent colors. And some of you are right about how hard it's going to be to explain to them why we "experimented" with them. It's going to be just awful for them, once they are old enough to comprehend, to learn that they were so very wanted, so desired that we were willing to endure blood, sweat and tears to get them here. What an awful thing for children to know! Oh, and there is something in those drugs that affects the way they look. Mine are outrageously beautiful. I mean, other worldly beautiful.

If infertility treatment is not for you, don't use it. Likewise, if you have a different medical problem and cutting-edge treatment and intervention isn't for you, then refuse it. But don't make infertility a different issue - it is a medical problem that can be treated in many people, and luckily for those in which it cannot, there are other options for becoming parents.

To the poster that said some people aren't meant to reproduce: there are many people who are here today but aren't meant to be - because they got cancer or another life-threatening illness. You probably know some of them. Do you feel it was unnatural for them to pursue treatment? I know it's not apples to apples, but why are advances in medicine okay for some conditions and not others?

Best wishes to all those struggling to become parents on this board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mom of two "biotech" kids here. Have to get off of DCUM now because I have to go plug them in; they have to be charged every night in order to work right during the day. Oh, and you probably know me. I'm the mom at the playground whose kids radiate florescent colors. And some of you are right about how hard it's going to be to explain to them why we "experimented" with them. It's going to be just awful for them, once they are old enough to comprehend, to learn that they were so very wanted, so desired that we were willing to endure blood, sweat and tears to get them here. What an awful thing for children to know! Oh, and there is something in those drugs that affects the way they look. Mine are outrageously beautiful. I mean, other worldly beautiful.

If infertility treatment is not for you, don't use it. Likewise, if you have a different medical problem and cutting-edge treatment and intervention isn't for you, then refuse it. But don't make infertility a different issue - it is a medical problem that can be treated in many people, and luckily for those in which it cannot, there are other options for becoming parents.

To the poster that said some people aren't meant to reproduce: there are many people who are here today but aren't meant to be - because they got cancer or another life-threatening illness. You probably know some of them. Do you feel it was unnatural for them to pursue treatment? I know it's not apples to apples, but why are advances in medicine okay for some conditions and not others?

Best wishes to all those struggling to become parents on this board.

you go girl!

[Anonymous]

Right. So you advocate passing on infertility to the next generation? (At least some infertility is part of the human condition, the rest is due to older parents, STDS, etc.) The part that is natural to the species was not meant to be passed on. I am sure those of us who have gone through the pain of infertility treatments would not wish the same on our children.

PP is right that some of the same issues can be taken with other medical advances. Of course, these usually affect only the adult's bodies not the next generation's health.
You should all know that reproductive technology is almost entirely unregulated by the U.S. government and is being driven larger by the profit motives of the fertility industry. Surely not how most (all?) of you would like to see medical advances happen. Don't we ALL have a vested in interest in making sure these things are safe? Would you want your sons and daughters to undergo treatments at a future date that are unstudied and unsafe? REALLY?

I am amazed that none of you seem to care about what happens to your bodies and to your children's bodies. There is already clear evidence that IVF kids have health issues derived from their conception. It makes sense at some concrete level too. Of course there is going to be an impact of being produced in a petri dish and then frozen. Freezing is a chemical reaction, and that is only one thing done to these embryos. After all most vegetables don't taste the same after being frozen either. Why would you think these kids are not being affected? Women's bodies are being pumped with drugs that make them overproduce at the cellular level - isn't that what stimulating more eggs means? Does it sound awfully similar to .. cancer?

Infertile patients don't want this studied, the fertility docs don't want it studied, the clinics don't want it studied. No one wants it thought about or regulated in a sensible manner. Perhaps if people were willing to think about it and push for science to think about it, then it could be made safer. The risks can probably be managed. But one has to be willing to understand the risks.

The donor kids. I think this is a massive ethical issue. As the PP said, they may know that they were wanted, in the same way that adopted kids do. It does not take away the psychological impact of being conceived by the gametes of strangers that they will never know. Who are their parents in a biological sense. Whether you like to hear it or not, biology is powerful and it matters. It is not everything, but it not nothing either. This is a terrible thing to do to children. Then add secrecy to the equation. I understand a lot of the kids are not being told the truth either. What else? It is a terrible thing that they can someday meet and fall in love with their blood brothers and sisters and not know it. This isn't about being a nervous nellie. This is about not allowing desperation to take over one's common sense.

[Anonymous]

PP again -

I just wanted to add that I sincerely wish the person who decided to stop treatments success in completing her family -- whether through adoption or a family of two. I mean no ill will. It is undoubtedly a hard thing to have gone through treatment and come to the decision it was the wrong thing to have done. You sound like you are still grieving the loss of your dreamed-of biological child and that is hard. Keep in mind that there are professional and peer networks that can offer support.

Ta again.

[Anonymous]

I really wish this had not become a debate on the merits of IF treatments, but if you are so worried about passing infertility on to our children, what about all the other things people risk passing on to their children? For example, should people with a family history of cancer or heart disease (and we all have a family history of something) not reproduce? Personally, I am much more worried about passing on my high risk of melanoma than I am worried about passing along the risk of infertility (esp b/c I suspect that my infertility was caused by environmental factors). Good luck to all -- this journey sucks enough without having to justify your choices!!!

[Anonymous]

Please note that the previous post was actually the mom of the two biotech kids. A note I wrote before 9.37 didn't make it in for some reason (I don't post much). But I didn't realize that - and that's why 9.37 says I'm the PP.

I'd like to note for the record that I've tasted my kids and they taste delicious, far superior to those of my friends who have conceived "fresh." So no concerns there.

My DH and I did our due diligence, just like most other people who undergo treatment. And we sought information from multiple sources, not just those with something to gain from our misfortune. Yes, I'm aware of the lack of oversight; in fact, I've been involved in efforts to step it up. Hopefully you are too -- it would be a good way to channel your frustration.

Also, can you please point me to the research that shows "there is already clear evidence that IVF kids have health issues derived from their conception." I'd like to read it. I'm serious about that.

And one more thing. My main fertility problem was that I'm anovulatory. I'm pretty certain I have not passed this on to my sons, but I'll keep you posted!

Ta!

[Anonymous]

To the poster who argued that some people aren't meant to reproduce (scary when you consider the number of children many low-lifes have...) -- Since it seems to me that a huge reason for the rise in infertility is delayed childbearing, it appears that their offspring should have no trouble getting pregnant if they start a little earlier.

[Anonymous]

To the poster who said: "there is already clear evidence that IVF kids have health issues derived from their conception."

Where are you getting your research? What studies are you looking at? I am a doctor who has researched this in-depth and this is simply not true!!! I also follow and test many of these children and have not found a difference! Additionally, many couples who go through infertility treatment due so for reasons that are NOT genetic and WILL NOT be passed on to their children. Please do not make such blanket statements.

I can think of a lot of genetic conditions people have that they get treated for outside of infertility - should we consider them not worthy of reproducing either? Maybe you shouldn't be passing on asthma, diabetes, heart disease, the list goes on and on so please don't point your finger at couples that use AR!

[Anonymous]

I never made a blanket statement that all infertility is genetic. Some of it is. No one is going to argue this. All animals have a percentage that is infertile. It's not fair to those afflicted. Let's try to separate facts from value judgements.

Please also remember that human beings ARE meant to be mortal. So not passing on heart disease is beside the point. Please also remember before you dismiss my arguments that human beings ARE meant to reproduce. So passing on genetic infertility is not smart.. Or ethical. Please also remember there are certain genetic and chromosomal conditions that we, as a society, have largely decided is not worth passing on. Conditions that severely impact a person's quality of life and that are relatively easy to screen out. For example Down's but there are lots of others. Therefore a discussion about genetic infertity is a reasonable one to have. Apparently the rest of you disagree. But this is not an unbiased crowd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Right. So you advocate passing on infertility to the next generation? (At least some infertility is part of the human condition, the rest is due to older parents, STDS, etc.) The part that is natural to the species was not meant to be passed on. I am sure those of us who have gone through the pain of infertility treatments would not wish the same on our children.

PP is right that some of the same issues can be taken with other medical advances. Of course, these usually affect only the adult's bodies not the next generation's health.
You should all know that reproductive technology is almost entirely unregulated by the U.S. government and is being driven larger by the profit motives of the fertility industry. Surely not how most (all?) of you would like to see medical advances happen. Don't we ALL have a vested in interest in making sure these things are safe? Would you want your sons and daughters to undergo treatments at a future date that are unstudied and unsafe? REALLY?

I am amazed that none of you seem to care about what happens to your bodies and to your children's bodies. There is already clear evidence that IVF kids have health issues derived from their conception. It makes sense at some concrete level too. Of course there is going to be an impact of being produced in a petri dish and then frozen. Freezing is a chemical reaction, and that is only one thing done to these embryos. After all most vegetables don't taste the same after being frozen either. Why would you think these kids are not being affected? Women's bodies are being pumped with drugs that make them overproduce at the cellular level - isn't that what stimulating more eggs means? Does it sound awfully similar to .. cancer?

Infertile patients don't want this studied, the fertility docs don't want it studied, the clinics don't want it studied. No one wants it thought about or regulated in a sensible manner. Perhaps if people were willing to think about it and push for science to think about it, then it could be made safer. The risks can probably be managed. But one has to be willing to understand the risks.

The donor kids. I think this is a massive ethical issue. As the PP said, they may know that they were wanted, in the same way that adopted kids do. It does not take away the psychological impact of being conceived by the gametes of strangers that they will never know. Who are their parents in a biological sense. Whether you like to hear it or not, biology is powerful and it matters. It is not everything, but it not nothing either. This is a terrible thing to do to children. Then add secrecy to the equation. I understand a lot of the kids are not being told the truth either. What else? It is a terrible thing that they can someday meet and fall in love with their blood brothers and sisters and not know it. This isn't about being a nervous nellie. This is about not allowing desperation to take over one's common sense.

I'm just wondering. What is your view on IUI? Is that biotech too? Or just "frozen vege" IVF babies. I have to say that I find your reasoning somewhat hilarious. (Especially the interesting assumption that all infertility is genetically based.) And am wondering why you're on the TTC board at all... But I am curious where you draw the line...

[Anonymous]

"Please also remember there are certain genetic and chromosomal conditions that we, as a society, have largely decided is not worth passing on. Conditions that severely impact a person's quality of life and that are relatively easy to screen out. For example Down's but there are lots of others."

Just an FYI, poster - Downs is due to a chromosomal abnormality, and is not a genetic condition that can be passed on to one's offspring.

Okay, so that last post makes it pretty clear that the troll doesn't know what she is talking about. Maybe we should just spoil her fun and call an end to this.

[Anonymous]

Ladies, I didn't say all infertility is genetic. I said some of it is. This is not a figment of my imagination.

Second, I said "genetic and chromosomal conditions". I then proceeded to give an example of a chromosomal condition, ie Downs. Do not misread everything! We get checked for lots of genetic conditions when pregnant in order to determine whether to carry forward or not. Tay Sachs, cystic fibrosis, etc. You may not like my message but don't shoot the messenger!

Someone else asked about IUI. I think there are risks associated with stimulating your ovaries to produce more cells. Again, I've explained the concern in an earlier post.

Why am I posting here? I have had a ton of fertility treatment and have decided to stop because of how I'll it was making me and also after talking to family members who are physicians. These people are concerned about me rather than making money. I think the fertility industry needs oversight and regulation, and safety standards. My guess is that treatments could be made safer BUT no one is seriously looking at the potential problems. Posting here has been instructive. Obviously the push toward oversight and standards may not come from the infertile themselves because not enough people are willing to question themselves.