Donor eggs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So my eggs are old and crappy at 40?

Yes -- this is news to you?

actually there was a study shogun that fetuses from older eggs have fewer developmental problems. the idea is that in older women selection is stronger so fewer eggs make embryos and more embryos are miscarried. but if chromosomes are fine they actually do well.

Not true, add, autism, etc. are all linked to older parents,

schizophrenia is linked to younger mothers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My friend has many failed rounds of IVF due to various health issues. She finally did donor eggs and was successful in conceiving twins. She’s so happy that I don’t even think she sits there and wonder about genetic connections.

a person who survived a car crash and only lost four fingers is probably very happy. doesn't mean that they wouldn't have preferred not to have been in the crash at all.

I understand what you are trying to say. Donor eggs aren’t something I would be comfortable with and evidently not for you either. However, I believe that one can be genuinely happy with a donor egg scenario and not long for their own genetic offspring.

I actually agree with that. I think that it is great that this option exists and I would have pursued it if I could have not had children otherwise. What bothers me is that attitude that it's the same thing, no big deal, "do you want a baby or not" etc. People are made to feel bad wanting what everyone else has.. It's ok to want genetic connection is all I am saying. People are not stupid for caring about that.

Exactly- one shouldn’t be made to feel bad if they want that genetic connection.

If you insist on genetic connection, you may have no children at all. Some people would rather have a child than genetic purity, especially given the various issues that are more likely with children conceived with old “eggs.”

If you care mostly about having a genetic connection with your child, start trying to conceive well before forty.

given that nobody can go back in time and have children in their youth, some women are faced with a choice to keep pursuing a child with their own eggs or to move to DE. and some of them feel pressured by REs to move to DE. i was personally scolded by my RE for not moving to DE ("do you want a baby or not") while my conceived-on-the-first-try then 18 month old was sitting in my lap. and in fact i did manage to have another child with my own eggs (not through IVF). according to you, i should have listened to my RE because i was old and i did want a baby more than a genetic connection. but i shouldn't have and i am glad i didn't.

in many cases there is just no way to say for sure whether a person will be able to have a child with their own eggs. that's just a fact. medical knowledge is not at the point where it is possible to know this except for some very drastic cases.

I think the people who go with de are every bit as happy as you with their children as you are. And there are many women who initiated on only their own eggs, and have no children, in fact, the odds tell us your ability to conceive was the exception, so yes, waiting until after 40 a nd then refusing de does result in heart break for many women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So my eggs are old and crappy at 40?

Yes -- this is news to you?

actually there was a study shogun that fetuses from older eggs have fewer developmental problems. the idea is that in older women selection is stronger so fewer eggs make embryos and more embryos are miscarried. but if chromosomes are fine they actually do well.

Not true, add, autism, etc. are all linked to older parents,

schizophrenia is linked to younger mothers.

If you think waiting until after 40 is medically superior to having a child at a younger age, logic is not your strong suit. Good luck to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My friend has many failed rounds of IVF due to various health issues. She finally did donor eggs and was successful in conceiving twins. She’s so happy that I don’t even think she sits there and wonder about genetic connections.

a person who survived a car crash and only lost four fingers is probably very happy. doesn't mean that they wouldn't have preferred not to have been in the crash at all.

I understand what you are trying to say. Donor eggs aren’t something I would be comfortable with and evidently not for you either. However, I believe that one can be genuinely happy with a donor egg scenario and not long for their own genetic offspring.

I actually agree with that. I think that it is great that this option exists and I would have pursued it if I could have not had children otherwise. What bothers me is that attitude that it's the same thing, no big deal, "do you want a baby or not" etc. People are made to feel bad wanting what everyone else has.. It's ok to want genetic connection is all I am saying. People are not stupid for caring about that.

Exactly- one shouldn’t be made to feel bad if they want that genetic connection.

If you insist on genetic connection, you may have no children at all. Some people would rather have a child than genetic purity, especially given the various issues that are more likely with children conceived with old “eggs.”

If you care mostly about having a genetic connection with your child, start trying to conceive well before forty.

given that nobody can go back in time and have children in their youth, some women are faced with a choice to keep pursuing a child with their own eggs or to move to DE. and some of them feel pressured by REs to move to DE. i was personally scolded by my RE for not moving to DE ("do you want a baby or not") while my conceived-on-the-first-try then 18 month old was sitting in my lap. and in fact i did manage to have another child with my own eggs (not through IVF). according to you, i should have listened to my RE because i was old and i did want a baby more than a genetic connection. but i shouldn't have and i am glad i didn't.

in many cases there is just no way to say for sure whether a person will be able to have a child with their own eggs. that's just a fact. medical knowledge is not at the point where it is possible to know this except for some very drastic cases.

I think the people who go with de are every bit as happy as you with their children as you are. And there are many women who initiated on only their own eggs, and have no children, in fact, the odds tell us your ability to conceive was the exception, so yes, waiting until after 40 a nd then refusing de does result in heart break for many women.

Insist, not initiated. And there is a data set which makes it very evident at what ages women are unlikely and very unlikely to have children with their own eggs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My friend has many failed rounds of IVF due to various health issues. She finally did donor eggs and was successful in conceiving twins. She’s so happy that I don’t even think she sits there and wonder about genetic connections.

a person who survived a car crash and only lost four fingers is probably very happy. doesn't mean that they wouldn't have preferred not to have been in the crash at all.

I understand what you are trying to say. Donor eggs aren’t something I would be comfortable with and evidently not for you either. However, I believe that one can be genuinely happy with a donor egg scenario and not long for their own genetic offspring.

I actually agree with that. I think that it is great that this option exists and I would have pursued it if I could have not had children otherwise. What bothers me is that attitude that it's the same thing, no big deal, "do you want a baby or not" etc. People are made to feel bad wanting what everyone else has.. It's ok to want genetic connection is all I am saying. People are not stupid for caring about that.

Exactly- one shouldn’t be made to feel bad if they want that genetic connection.

If you insist on genetic connection, you may have no children at all. Some people would rather have a child than genetic purity, especially given the various issues that are more likely with children conceived with old “eggs.”

If you care mostly about having a genetic connection with your child, start trying to conceive well before forty.

given that nobody can go back in time and have children in their youth, some women are faced with a choice to keep pursuing a child with their own eggs or to move to DE. and some of them feel pressured by REs to move to DE. i was personally scolded by my RE for not moving to DE ("do you want a baby or not") while my conceived-on-the-first-try then 18 month old was sitting in my lap. and in fact i did manage to have another child with my own eggs (not through IVF). according to you, i should have listened to my RE because i was old and i did want a baby more than a genetic connection. but i shouldn't have and i am glad i didn't.

in many cases there is just no way to say for sure whether a person will be able to have a child with their own eggs. that's just a fact. medical knowledge is not at the point where it is possible to know this except for some very drastic cases.

I think the people who go with de are every bit as happy as you with their children as you are. And there are many women who initiated on only their own eggs, and have no children, in fact, the odds tell us your ability to conceive was the exception, so yes, waiting until after 40 a nd then refusing de does result in heart break for many women.

i am not saying they are not as happy. human mind works in mysterious ways. there are many studies showing that people with quadriplegia are equally happy as other people. doesn't mean anyone wants that.

also, i am not advising anyone to wait till 40 to have children. but some women find themselves in those circumstances for various reasons, and odds are, this will continue to happen. the average age of the last child in populations that didn't use contraception was 42. so having a child at 41, while to a rule is not a newsworthy exception either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So my eggs are old and crappy at 40?

Yes -- this is news to you?

actually there was a study shogun that fetuses from older eggs have fewer developmental problems. the idea is that in older women selection is stronger so fewer eggs make embryos and more embryos are miscarried. but if chromosomes are fine they actually do well.

Not true, add, autism, etc. are all linked to older parents,

schizophrenia is linked to younger mothers.

If you think waiting until after 40 is medically superior to having a child at a younger age, logic is not your strong suit. Good luck to you.

I am not saying it's superior but st the same time some of these risks are overblown. A vast majority of age-related problems stems from 1) i fertility 2) miscarriage 3) t21 and similar chromosomal disorders. Risks for things like autism are only slightly elevated (15%) which is much less than risks of boy vs girl or having a sibling with autism for example. at the same time risks for some devastating issues such as schizophrenia for example are higher among younger women.

the fact of the matter is, women have been having children in their forties for as long as human species existed. if that were not supposed to happen it wouldn't be happening any more often than growing a new set of teeth at 40 is happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think many people who don’t “get” de are childless. As a parent of conceived naturally, I can see how little of being a parent is dependent on a genetic relationship.

Agree. I would have felt more this way before having children, when I envisioned my future children as miniature versions of me. I have two bio children. They don't look anything like me and their personalities and interests are completely different from mine. I never see glimpses of myself or my family in them, even though I know I gave birth to both, and my joy in them is about them, not me. It truly doesn't matter. The child is "yours" whether biologically or not.

[Anonymous]

OP here - one (or few) of PPs very nicely argued why DE should not pushed onto women 40+ while being supportive of the women who chose DE. I agree with all her various arguments.

I am going a step further - I am saying that DE practice is a money and success rates scheme for the clinics that renders DE child denied of his/her human right to know their genetic mother.
For me, DE is immoral and cruel to a child. I cannot see any life scenario in which my feelings and longings for a child should override what I consider a fundamental human right; for a person to know where they come from. Being happy for having a DE child can never ever in mind override the resentment and hate that DE child will inevitably feel for me and all involved into bringing him/her into the world once he/she is an adult. In fact, I can foresee many lawsuits in future from DE children.

[Anonymous]

Why are there so many judgmental assholes on this thread?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here - one (or few) of PPs very nicely argued why DE should not pushed onto women 40+ while being supportive of the women who chose DE. I agree with all her various arguments.

I am going a step further - I am saying that DE practice is a money and success rates scheme for the clinics that renders DE child denied of his/her human right to know their genetic mother.
For me, DE is immoral and cruel to a child. I cannot see any life scenario in which my feelings and longings for a child should override what I consider a fundamental human right; for a person to know where they come from. Being happy for having a DE child can never ever in mind override the resentment and hate that DE child will inevitably feel for me and all involved into bringing him/her into the world once he/she is an adult. In fact, I can foresee many lawsuits in future from DE children.

You are entitled to your opinion just as others are entitled to theirs. Many people are perfectly happy with children conceived through donor eggs/sperm. Is that hard for you to fathom? Are you also against adoption? Don't project your emotions on others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - one (or few) of PPs very nicely argued why DE should not pushed onto women 40+ while being supportive of the women who chose DE. I agree with all her various arguments.

I am going a step further - I am saying that DE practice is a money and success rates scheme for the clinics that renders DE child denied of his/her human right to know their genetic mother.
For me, DE is immoral and cruel to a child. I cannot see any life scenario in which my feelings and longings for a child should override what I consider a fundamental human right; for a person to know where they come from. Being happy for having a DE child can never ever in mind override the resentment and hate that DE child will inevitably feel for me and all involved into bringing him/her into the world once he/she is an adult. In fact, I can foresee many lawsuits in future from DE children.

You are entitled to your opinion just as others are entitled to theirs. Many people are perfectly happy with children conceived through donor eggs/sperm. Is that hard for you to fathom? Are you also against adoption? Don't project your emotions on others.

OP here - not projecting anything, simply looking at things from a DE child's perspective. And the view ain't pretty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here - one (or few) of PPs very nicely argued why DE should not pushed onto women 40+ while being supportive of the women who chose DE. I agree with all her various arguments.

I am going a step further - I am saying that DE practice is a money and success rates scheme for the clinics that renders DE child denied of his/her human right to know their genetic mother.
For me, DE is immoral and cruel to a child. I cannot see any life scenario in which my feelings and longings for a child should override what I consider a fundamental human right; for a person to know where they come from. Being happy for having a DE child can never ever in mind override the resentment and hate that DE child will inevitably feel for me and all involved into bringing him/her into the world once he/she is an adult. In fact, I can foresee many lawsuits in future from DE children.

You're making the assumption that all DE children are being denied their rights to know their genetic mother. That simply isn't true. It was one of the prime areas I had to research in order to be comfortable moving forward with it myself, because I agree, people do want to understand their genetic background. That's why Ancestry and 23andMe websites are so popular. There is study after study showing hat if you treat DE like the closed adoptions of old, then yes, you are taking the risk of raising a child who eventually resents you for failing to provide them with a true understanding of their background. But if you treat DE like an open adoption, where you disclose early and often that the baby was created using donated genetic cells, then you can avoid such resentment. My daughter will have a complete file and record of her genetic heritage, including pictures and health records of the donor. Will it be a challenge navigating all of this? Of course it will. Do I think it's insurmountable? Not at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - one (or few) of PPs very nicely argued why DE should not pushed onto women 40+ while being supportive of the women who chose DE. I agree with all her various arguments.

I am going a step further - I am saying that DE practice is a money and success rates scheme for the clinics that renders DE child denied of his/her human right to know their genetic mother.
For me, DE is immoral and cruel to a child. I cannot see any life scenario in which my feelings and longings for a child should override what I consider a fundamental human right; for a person to know where they come from. Being happy for having a DE child can never ever in mind override the resentment and hate that DE child will inevitably feel for me and all involved into bringing him/her into the world once he/she is an adult. In fact, I can foresee many lawsuits in future from DE children.

You're making the assumption that all DE children are being denied their rights to know their genetic mother. That simply isn't true. It was one of the prime areas I had to research in order to be comfortable moving forward with it myself, because I agree, people do want to understand their genetic background. That's why Ancestry and 23andMe websites are so popular. There is study after study showing hat if you treat DE like the closed adoptions of old, then yes, you are taking the risk of raising a child who eventually resents you for failing to provide them with a true understanding of their background. But if you treat DE like an open adoption, where you disclose early and often that the baby was created using donated genetic cells, then you can avoid such resentment. My daughter will have a complete file and record of her genetic heritage, including pictures and health records of the donor. Will it be a challenge navigating all of this? Of course it will. Do I think it's insurmountable? Not at all.

OP here - kudos to you for treating your DE child as a full human being with full human rights. That is amazing and I mean it. So many DE/sperm donor children are denied these fundamental truths. So, you are an exception rather than a rule.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - one (or few) of PPs very nicely argued why DE should not pushed onto women 40+ while being supportive of the women who chose DE. I agree with all her various arguments.

I am going a step further - I am saying that DE practice is a money and success rates scheme for the clinics that renders DE child denied of his/her human right to know their genetic mother.
For me, DE is immoral and cruel to a child. I cannot see any life scenario in which my feelings and longings for a child should override what I consider a fundamental human right; for a person to know where they come from. Being happy for having a DE child can never ever in mind override the resentment and hate that DE child will inevitably feel for me and all involved into bringing him/her into the world once he/she is an adult. In fact, I can foresee many lawsuits in future from DE children.

You're making the assumption that all DE children are being denied their rights to know their genetic mother. That simply isn't true. It was one of the prime areas I had to research in order to be comfortable moving forward with it myself, because I agree, people do want to understand their genetic background. That's why Ancestry and 23andMe websites are so popular. There is study after study showing hat if you treat DE like the closed adoptions of old, then yes, you are taking the risk of raising a child who eventually resents you for failing to provide them with a true understanding of their background. But if you treat DE like an open adoption, where you disclose early and often that the baby was created using donated genetic cells, then you can avoid such resentment. My daughter will have a complete file and record of her genetic heritage, including pictures and health records of the donor. Will it be a challenge navigating all of this? Of course it will. Do I think it's insurmountable? Not at all.

OP here - kudos to you for treating your DE child as a full human being with full human rights. That is amazing and I mean it. So many DE/sperm donor children are denied these fundamental truths. So, you are an exception rather than a rule.

Where are you getting your statistics from? A lot of information is available about egg donors these days. Several of the profiles we looked at had women who were open to contact when the child turned eighteen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - one (or few) of PPs very nicely argued why DE should not pushed onto women 40+ while being supportive of the women who chose DE. I agree with all her various arguments.

I am going a step further - I am saying that DE practice is a money and success rates scheme for the clinics that renders DE child denied of his/her human right to know their genetic mother.
For me, DE is immoral and cruel to a child. I cannot see any life scenario in which my feelings and longings for a child should override what I consider a fundamental human right; for a person to know where they come from. Being happy for having a DE child can never ever in mind override the resentment and hate that DE child will inevitably feel for me and all involved into bringing him/her into the world once he/she is an adult. In fact, I can foresee many lawsuits in future from DE children.

You're making the assumption that all DE children are being denied their rights to know their genetic mother. That simply isn't true. It was one of the prime areas I had to research in order to be comfortable moving forward with it myself, because I agree, people do want to understand their genetic background. That's why Ancestry and 23andMe websites are so popular. There is study after study showing hat if you treat DE like the closed adoptions of old, then yes, you are taking the risk of raising a child who eventually resents you for failing to provide them with a true understanding of their background. But if you treat DE like an open adoption, where you disclose early and often that the baby was created using donated genetic cells, then you can avoid such resentment. My daughter will have a complete file and record of her genetic heritage, including pictures and health records of the donor. Will it be a challenge navigating all of this? Of course it will. Do I think it's insurmountable? Not at all.

OP here - kudos to you for treating your DE child as a full human being with full human rights. That is amazing and I mean it. So many DE/sperm donor children are denied these fundamental truths. So, you are an exception rather than a rule.

No, I'm just not. There are plenty of bio moms who feel this way.

Look, I experienced 8 consecutive losses, including a few in the second trimester trying to bring a second baby into my home. I have one naturally conceived daughter, who as it happens looks very little like me, she's all dad. She's not my mini-me by any stretch. She did inherit some of my music and dance abilities (I was a former professional ballet dancer). Of course genetics are heritable. The semi-anonymous donor we chose (she is open to being contacted by my child when she turns 18) is a brilliant musician. Choosing someone who is artistic and could fit into my genetic "tribe" (my whole family is artistic) was important, I won't lie. But what was most important to me was to bring this little spirit into the world who has been haunting me for six years, never making it to this earthly plain. SIX YEARS. At 37 weeks pregnant right now, I have absolutely no question that I am the mother of the baby I am nurturing and carrying. I also am a huge believer in epigenetics. I'm 37 weeks and have been continuing to dance most of this pregnancy. My growing this baby will have huge impacts on what genes are triggered and what genes aren't.

BTW - After my sixth loss it was determined I wasn't just dealing with AMA related difficulties, there's something wrong with my eggs beyond age. Because not all of my losses were aneuploidies. I am probably a carrier of an as-of-yet untestable genetic mutation. My docs all agree that I would likely keep getting pregnant and keep miscarrying, sometimes into the second trimester.

DE is a complex world to navigate. Yes, I agree, most REs - particularly on the east coast - don't give a lot of thought to ramifications. East coast clinics like SG don't even offer the option of donors who aren't completely anonymous, and I think that's a huge mistake. But to suggest that third-party reproduction is automatically "immoral and cruel" stings, to the millions of mothers out there who would never be able to nurture and love children because of the cruelty of infertility.