Donating our embryos through an open placement -- AMA

[Anonymous]

People are crazy about this kind of stuff, OP! Don’t let the DCUM negativity get to you.

I agree that being alive is better than being dead, and that giving these embryos a chance to be alive is on balance a good thing. You cannot guarantee them a perfect life but that is true of every baby born! Should we all stop having kids because they might someday experience negative emotions? It’s a part if life! You do what you can and you leave the rest up to fate/god/whatever.

I also agree that it is very different from adoption. With adoption, the baby already exists and then the parents opt out of parenting their kid. With embryo donation, this is the only way to offer the child a chance at existence and you have done so in a way that leave the door open for the child to know more about his/her genetic heritage should that need arise.

I think this is a great way to honor the struggle you had conceiving and the blessed result of your own three kids by giving another family a chance at having a child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you feel about the fact that you are likely creating a trauma for any kids that result from this "donation"? Any adoption, no matter how loving and secure, is a trauma for the child, knowing that his/her bio parents couldn't or wouldn't take care of him.

OP here.

Is this a serious question? Seems kinda troll-like.

OP did you research adoption at all before you did this?

OP here.

I researched adoption a bit, but only some of the issues overlap with embryo donation. Much of what's out there about baby adoption is somewhat off for this particular type of arrangement.

The agency provides a thorough set of FAQs for both the donors and adopters, and we read all of that info.

Here are two tremendous differences between baby adoption and embryo donation:

1. Our embryos aren't babies.
2. I won't carry the embryo until it becomes a baby.

I imagine that any future child will take heart in knowing that my husband and I didn't place him/her up for adoption. Rather, we're giving embryos a chance at becoming a baby.

I'm truly just a cell donor. The adopting mother will not only raise the child, by gestating a baby she will also create a biological link to the child. New-ish research shows that a gestational mother's DNA influences a baby's genes. Isn't that amazing!

\

If you truly don't think the embryos are babies, then I'm not sure why you're wading into this ethical quagmire. At the very least, it seems like you'd go into it with WAY lowered expectations for what kind of contact you'll have with the child.

NP, but can't you accept that there's a bit of grey area here in terms of emotions and biological relationships? I also don't believe that embryos are babies, but also can completely understand how one feels a connection to their embryos and can imagine a connection between her children (who she's raising) and the "could have been my child". OP seems to respect the the existing and potential human beings touched by this decision, and has made (in my opinion) a commendable decision to grant another couple the opportunity to be parents, while also helping to fill in the gaps that such a donation might leave in the resulting child's psyche.

I have a daughter conceived of by my own egg and husband's sperm, but a second child for us would mean DE. I'm actually leaning towards an embryo donation if we end up looking to expand our family, because I want my children to truly believe that the egg and sperm are ultimately minimal factors in the definition of family (for us, at least). Using just DE sends a more mixed message (like, genes don't matter and you're still Mom's child, but they kind of do, so we still wanted Dad's sperm). I'm still puzzling through all of this personally but I would welcome an opportunity to work with someone like OP to complete our family. (and I'm Jewish, so I appreciate the perspective of using a Christian agency when you're not actually Christian).

that's entirely too neat a viewpoint. yes, OP is commendable for deciding to donate to another family; but she's donating to a family that could afford to make their own embryos, so she's not actually giving them the "opportunity to be parents." and it's just a fantasy to think that OP can mitigate now any potential trauma caused by the adoption. she'd have more integrity if she admitted she doesn't know what the risk is, but thinks that the benefits of the children being created outweigh the risks to the child.

Did I miss the part about the adoptive family being able to afford (or even create in the first place) their own embryos? I might have. Regardless:

I don't think the OP can eliminate any potential trauma -- nobody in the world can promise to eliminate trauma from another person's life -- but I do think that an open relationship can help mitigate any potential trauma. Mitigate, as in, make less severe. Generally open dialogue between people with good intentions results in a more positive outcome than no dialogue.

Certainly this is not a clean, clear situation, but there's no child in the world who can be guaranteed a clean, clear existence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you feel about the fact that you are likely creating a trauma for any kids that result from this "donation"? Any adoption, no matter how loving and secure, is a trauma for the child, knowing that his/her bio parents couldn't or wouldn't take care of him.

OP here.

Is this a serious question? Seems kinda troll-like.

OP did you research adoption at all before you did this?

OP here.

I researched adoption a bit, but only some of the issues overlap with embryo donation. Much of what's out there about baby adoption is somewhat off for this particular type of arrangement.

The agency provides a thorough set of FAQs for both the donors and adopters, and we read all of that info.

Here are two tremendous differences between baby adoption and embryo donation:

1. Our embryos aren't babies.
2. I won't carry the embryo until it becomes a baby.

I imagine that any future child will take heart in knowing that my husband and I didn't place him/her up for adoption. Rather, we're giving embryos a chance at becoming a baby.

I'm truly just a cell donor. The adopting mother will not only raise the child, by gestating a baby she will also create a biological link to the child. New-ish research shows that a gestational mother's DNA influences a baby's genes. Isn't that amazing!

\

If you truly don't think the embryos are babies, then I'm not sure why you're wading into this ethical quagmire. At the very least, it seems like you'd go into it with WAY lowered expectations for what kind of contact you'll have with the child.

NP, but can't you accept that there's a bit of grey area here in terms of emotions and biological relationships? I also don't believe that embryos are babies, but also can completely understand how one feels a connection to their embryos and can imagine a connection between her children (who she's raising) and the "could have been my child". OP seems to respect the the existing and potential human beings touched by this decision, and has made (in my opinion) a commendable decision to grant another couple the opportunity to be parents, while also helping to fill in the gaps that such a donation might leave in the resulting child's psyche.

I have a daughter conceived of by my own egg and husband's sperm, but a second child for us would mean DE. I'm actually leaning towards an embryo donation if we end up looking to expand our family, because I want my children to truly believe that the egg and sperm are ultimately minimal factors in the definition of family (for us, at least). Using just DE sends a more mixed message (like, genes don't matter and you're still Mom's child, but they kind of do, so we still wanted Dad's sperm). I'm still puzzling through all of this personally but I would welcome an opportunity to work with someone like OP to complete our family. (and I'm Jewish, so I appreciate the perspective of using a Christian agency when you're not actually Christian).

that's entirely too neat a viewpoint. yes, OP is commendable for deciding to donate to another family; but she's donating to a family that could afford to make their own embryos, so she's not actually giving them the "opportunity to be parents." and it's just a fantasy to think that OP can mitigate now any potential trauma caused by the adoption. she'd have more integrity if she admitted she doesn't know what the risk is, but thinks that the benefits of the children being created outweigh the risks to the child.

Did I miss the part about the adoptive family being able to afford (or even create in the first place) their own embryos? I might have. Regardless:

I don't think the OP can eliminate any potential trauma -- nobody in the world can promise to eliminate trauma from another person's life -- but I do think that an open relationship can help mitigate any potential trauma. Mitigate, as in, make less severe. Generally open dialogue between people with good intentions results in a more positive outcome than no dialogue.

Certainly this is not a clean, clear situation, but there's no child in the world who can be guaranteed a clean, clear existence.

1) yes, OP says this couple is white-collar and well-off
2) the point its, IT IS NOT WITHIN OP'S CONTROL to establish an open relationship. she has no legal right to it. she has NO POWER to mitigate anything. She will not be the child's parent
3) at this point, they are embryos, not children. OP is deciding to turn them into children, making her responsible for the circumstances into which they are born.

[Anonymous]

OP, thank you so much for this thread. It's the most interesting thing I have read on here in a while.

My mind is blown!

It would hurt me to discard or donate any embryos to science(if we had any), but I think I couldn't do what you are doing. The DE would be my child. I would want to know everything that the other family is doing. I couldn't be comfortable with annual updates-I'd need much more.

If I was somehow able to go through with something like this, I would regret it if the other family ended up poorer(financially and emotionally - say divorce and such) than we are. I will be pretty happy if the DE children were better off than the ones in my house (more money, and parents who love and respect each other atlease as much as DH and I do).

However, philosophically I completely agree with you that the children are better off with a little (or a lot) of trauma from adoption than not being given a chance to be born. But practically, I'd be too crazy for this to work out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People are crazy about this kind of stuff, OP! Don’t let the DCUM negativity get to you.

I agree that being alive is better than being dead, and that giving these embryos a chance to be alive is on balance a good thing. You cannot guarantee them a perfect life but that is true of every baby born! Should we all stop having kids because they might someday experience negative emotions? It’s a part if life! You do what you can and you leave the rest up to fate/god/whatever.

I also agree that it is very different from adoption. With adoption, the baby already exists and then the parents opt out of parenting their kid. With embryo donation, this is the only way to offer the child a chance at existence and you have done so in a way that leave the door open for the child to know more about his/her genetic heritage should that need arise.

I think this is a great way to honor the struggle you had conceiving and the blessed result of your own three kids by giving another family a chance at having a child.

I find this question fascinating, and frankly the whole discussion.

If you believe an embryo is not a baby, then why wouldn't abortion be just as valid a decision? I am also curious as to OP's thoughts on abortion.

OP touched on the part where I feel it truly differs from traditional adoption. Carrying a baby term leaves indelible marks on both the baby and the mother. The baby has heard and felt and been fed by the mother. The mom has felt the baby move and hiccup and the baby is altering mom's body. I also believe this path mitigates the pain for both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you feel about the fact that you are likely creating a trauma for any kids that result from this "donation"? Any adoption, no matter how loving and secure, is a trauma for the child, knowing that his/her bio parents couldn't or wouldn't take care of him.

OP here.

Is this a serious question? Seems kinda troll-like.

OP did you research adoption at all before you did this?

OP here.

I researched adoption a bit, but only some of the issues overlap with embryo donation. Much of what's out there about baby adoption is somewhat off for this particular type of arrangement.

The agency provides a thorough set of FAQs for both the donors and adopters, and we read all of that info.

Here are two tremendous differences between baby adoption and embryo donation:

1. Our embryos aren't babies.
2. I won't carry the embryo until it becomes a baby.

I imagine that any future child will take heart in knowing that my husband and I didn't place him/her up for adoption. Rather, we're giving embryos a chance at becoming a baby.

I'm truly just a cell donor. The adopting mother will not only raise the child, by gestating a baby she will also create a biological link to the child. New-ish research shows that a gestational mother's DNA influences a baby's genes. Isn't that amazing!

\

If you truly don't think the embryos are babies, then I'm not sure why you're wading into this ethical quagmire. At the very least, it seems like you'd go into it with WAY lowered expectations for what kind of contact you'll have with the child.

NP, but can't you accept that there's a bit of grey area here in terms of emotions and biological relationships? I also don't believe that embryos are babies, but also can completely understand how one feels a connection to their embryos and can imagine a connection between her children (who she's raising) and the "could have been my child". OP seems to respect the the existing and potential human beings touched by this decision, and has made (in my opinion) a commendable decision to grant another couple the opportunity to be parents, while also helping to fill in the gaps that such a donation might leave in the resulting child's psyche.

I have a daughter conceived of by my own egg and husband's sperm, but a second child for us would mean DE. I'm actually leaning towards an embryo donation if we end up looking to expand our family, because I want my children to truly believe that the egg and sperm are ultimately minimal factors in the definition of family (for us, at least). Using just DE sends a more mixed message (like, genes don't matter and you're still Mom's child, but they kind of do, so we still wanted Dad's sperm). I'm still puzzling through all of this personally but I would welcome an opportunity to work with someone like OP to complete our family. (and I'm Jewish, so I appreciate the perspective of using a Christian agency when you're not actually Christian).

that's entirely too neat a viewpoint. yes, OP is commendable for deciding to donate to another family; but she's donating to a family that could afford to make their own embryos, so she's not actually giving them the "opportunity to be parents." and it's just a fantasy to think that OP can mitigate now any potential trauma caused by the adoption. she'd have more integrity if she admitted she doesn't know what the risk is, but thinks that the benefits of the children being created outweigh the risks to the child.

OP here.

For health reasons the adopting family can't make their own embryos.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you feel about the fact that you are likely creating a trauma for any kids that result from this "donation"? Any adoption, no matter how loving and secure, is a trauma for the child, knowing that his/her bio parents couldn't or wouldn't take care of him.

OP here.

Is this a serious question? Seems kinda troll-like.

OP did you research adoption at all before you did this?

OP here.

I researched adoption a bit, but only some of the issues overlap with embryo donation. Much of what's out there about baby adoption is somewhat off for this particular type of arrangement.

The agency provides a thorough set of FAQs for both the donors and adopters, and we read all of that info.

Here are two tremendous differences between baby adoption and embryo donation:

1. Our embryos aren't babies.
2. I won't carry the embryo until it becomes a baby.

I imagine that any future child will take heart in knowing that my husband and I didn't place him/her up for adoption. Rather, we're giving embryos a chance at becoming a baby.

I'm truly just a cell donor. The adopting mother will not only raise the child, by gestating a baby she will also create a biological link to the child. New-ish research shows that a gestational mother's DNA influences a baby's genes. Isn't that amazing!

OP, I'm the person who asked the top question again. I'm honestly having a hard time understanding why not being the person carrying these embryos to term changes anything about the fact that this is an adoption with almost all the concerns that any adoption would entail.

I'm not criticizing your decision to donate. I'm just trying to understand the thought process and really contemplate all the potential reactions and responses from the adoptees. Just because you consider yourself just a cell donor doesn't mean that these potential kids will see it that way or not have conflicting feelings about the situation. So that's the genesis of my questions on this issue, because I've spent many hours thinking about it.

OP here.

Let's suppose that a child created from our embryos feels the typical stresses that go along with a standard baby adoption. Except in unusual circumstances, that child is better off alive than hanging out in a petri dish, being thawed, being used for science, or undergoing a compassionate transfer.

Life is stressful, and frequently we don't get to choose the burdens we bear. If I could wave a magic wand, perhaps I'd take away a future kid's possible pain from knowing we donated him as an embryo. But I only have my inner guide that tells me that a future kid would appreciate being given a chance at life, even if that life involved some psychological discomfort.

In short: The donation may mean emotional pain for the future kid, and I'm OK with that because the kid will get a chance to live.

Am I getting to the heart of your question?

Are you anti-abortion, OP?

OP here.

I am pro-choice. A woman who does not want to carry a baby should not be forced to, I believe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you feel about the fact that you are likely creating a trauma for any kids that result from this "donation"? Any adoption, no matter how loving and secure, is a trauma for the child, knowing that his/her bio parents couldn't or wouldn't take care of him.

OP here.

Is this a serious question? Seems kinda troll-like.

OP did you research adoption at all before you did this?

OP here.

I researched adoption a bit, but only some of the issues overlap with embryo donation. Much of what's out there about baby adoption is somewhat off for this particular type of arrangement.

The agency provides a thorough set of FAQs for both the donors and adopters, and we read all of that info.

Here are two tremendous differences between baby adoption and embryo donation:

1. Our embryos aren't babies.
2. I won't carry the embryo until it becomes a baby.

I imagine that any future child will take heart in knowing that my husband and I didn't place him/her up for adoption. Rather, we're giving embryos a chance at becoming a baby.

I'm truly just a cell donor. The adopting mother will not only raise the child, by gestating a baby she will also create a biological link to the child. New-ish research shows that a gestational mother's DNA influences a baby's genes. Isn't that amazing!

\

If you truly don't think the embryos are babies, then I'm not sure why you're wading into this ethical quagmire. At the very least, it seems like you'd go into it with WAY lowered expectations for what kind of contact you'll have with the child.

OP here.

At this point, we expect to only receive annual updates. However, the agency will also be in touch with the adopting family to monitor the child.

What? no. That's not how this works. Neither you nor the agency has any right to "monitor the child."

OP here.

The adopting families have agreed to a contract that includes the agency's monitoring provision. It's possible that they won't honor the contract, but I suspect they will, based on my interactions with them so far.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you feel about the fact that you are likely creating a trauma for any kids that result from this "donation"? Any adoption, no matter how loving and secure, is a trauma for the child, knowing that his/her bio parents couldn't or wouldn't take care of him.

OP here.

Is this a serious question? Seems kinda troll-like.

OP did you research adoption at all before you did this?

OP here.

I researched adoption a bit, but only some of the issues overlap with embryo donation. Much of what's out there about baby adoption is somewhat off for this particular type of arrangement.

The agency provides a thorough set of FAQs for both the donors and adopters, and we read all of that info.

Here are two tremendous differences between baby adoption and embryo donation:

1. Our embryos aren't babies.
2. I won't carry the embryo until it becomes a baby.

I imagine that any future child will take heart in knowing that my husband and I didn't place him/her up for adoption. Rather, we're giving embryos a chance at becoming a baby.

I'm truly just a cell donor. The adopting mother will not only raise the child, by gestating a baby she will also create a biological link to the child. New-ish research shows that a gestational mother's DNA influences a baby's genes. Isn't that amazing!

\

If you truly don't think the embryos are babies, then I'm not sure why you're wading into this ethical quagmire. At the very least, it seems like you'd go into it with WAY lowered expectations for what kind of contact you'll have with the child.

NP, but can't you accept that there's a bit of grey area here in terms of emotions and biological relationships? I also don't believe that embryos are babies, but also can completely understand how one feels a connection to their embryos and can imagine a connection between her children (who she's raising) and the "could have been my child". OP seems to respect the the existing and potential human beings touched by this decision, and has made (in my opinion) a commendable decision to grant another couple the opportunity to be parents, while also helping to fill in the gaps that such a donation might leave in the resulting child's psyche.

I have a daughter conceived of by my own egg and husband's sperm, but a second child for us would mean DE. I'm actually leaning towards an embryo donation if we end up looking to expand our family, because I want my children to truly believe that the egg and sperm are ultimately minimal factors in the definition of family (for us, at least). Using just DE sends a more mixed message (like, genes don't matter and you're still Mom's child, but they kind of do, so we still wanted Dad's sperm). I'm still puzzling through all of this personally but I would welcome an opportunity to work with someone like OP to complete our family. (and I'm Jewish, so I appreciate the perspective of using a Christian agency when you're not actually Christian).

that's entirely too neat a viewpoint. yes, OP is commendable for deciding to donate to another family; but she's donating to a family that could afford to make their own embryos, so she's not actually giving them the "opportunity to be parents." and it's just a fantasy to think that OP can mitigate now any potential trauma caused by the adoption. she'd have more integrity if she admitted she doesn't know what the risk is, but thinks that the benefits of the children being created outweigh the risks to the child.

Did I miss the part about the adoptive family being able to afford (or even create in the first place) their own embryos? I might have. Regardless:

I don't think the OP can eliminate any potential trauma -- nobody in the world can promise to eliminate trauma from another person's life -- but I do think that an open relationship can help mitigate any potential trauma. Mitigate, as in, make less severe. Generally open dialogue between people with good intentions results in a more positive outcome than no dialogue.

Certainly this is not a clean, clear situation, but there's no child in the world who can be guaranteed a clean, clear existence.

1) yes, OP says this couple is white-collar and well-off
2) the point its, IT IS NOT WITHIN OP'S CONTROL to establish an open relationship. she has no legal right to it. she has NO POWER to mitigate anything. She will not be the child's parent
3) at this point, they are embryos, not children. OP is deciding to turn them into children, making her responsible for the circumstances into which they are born.

OP is giving the adoptive parents the chance to make that decision. OP herself is not turning them into children.

[Anonymous]

It seems like a cruel and arbitrary roll of the dice that some of your and your DH's biological kids will get to live with their bio parents and not have the emotional issues that come with adoption, and some won't and will consequently be weighed down with what is inevitable emotional turmoil.

I understand that you feel science or compassionate transfer or not using the embryos is also cruel, and I admit I do not identify with that.

In any case, what a terrible conundrum. I do not envy your decision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you feel about the fact that you are likely creating a trauma for any kids that result from this "donation"? Any adoption, no matter how loving and secure, is a trauma for the child, knowing that his/her bio parents couldn't or wouldn't take care of him.

OP here.

Is this a serious question? Seems kinda troll-like.

OP did you research adoption at all before you did this?

OP here.

I researched adoption a bit, but only some of the issues overlap with embryo donation. Much of what's out there about baby adoption is somewhat off for this particular type of arrangement.

The agency provides a thorough set of FAQs for both the donors and adopters, and we read all of that info.

Here are two tremendous differences between baby adoption and embryo donation:

1. Our embryos aren't babies.
2. I won't carry the embryo until it becomes a baby.

I imagine that any future child will take heart in knowing that my husband and I didn't place him/her up for adoption. Rather, we're giving embryos a chance at becoming a baby.

I'm truly just a cell donor. The adopting mother will not only raise the child, by gestating a baby she will also create a biological link to the child. New-ish research shows that a gestational mother's DNA influences a baby's genes. Isn't that amazing!

\

If you truly don't think the embryos are babies, then I'm not sure why you're wading into this ethical quagmire. At the very least, it seems like you'd go into it with WAY lowered expectations for what kind of contact you'll have with the child.

NP, but can't you accept that there's a bit of grey area here in terms of emotions and biological relationships? I also don't believe that embryos are babies, but also can completely understand how one feels a connection to their embryos and can imagine a connection between her children (who she's raising) and the "could have been my child". OP seems to respect the the existing and potential human beings touched by this decision, and has made (in my opinion) a commendable decision to grant another couple the opportunity to be parents, while also helping to fill in the gaps that such a donation might leave in the resulting child's psyche.

I have a daughter conceived of by my own egg and husband's sperm, but a second child for us would mean DE. I'm actually leaning towards an embryo donation if we end up looking to expand our family, because I want my children to truly believe that the egg and sperm are ultimately minimal factors in the definition of family (for us, at least). Using just DE sends a more mixed message (like, genes don't matter and you're still Mom's child, but they kind of do, so we still wanted Dad's sperm). I'm still puzzling through all of this personally but I would welcome an opportunity to work with someone like OP to complete our family. (and I'm Jewish, so I appreciate the perspective of using a Christian agency when you're not actually Christian).

that's entirely too neat a viewpoint. yes, OP is commendable for deciding to donate to another family; but she's donating to a family that could afford to make their own embryos, so she's not actually giving them the "opportunity to be parents." and it's just a fantasy to think that OP can mitigate now any potential trauma caused by the adoption. she'd have more integrity if she admitted she doesn't know what the risk is, but thinks that the benefits of the children being created outweigh the risks to the child.

she is saying exactly that.

Right - that's what I'm getting at. OP believes the embryos are people with a right to life.

OP here.

To be clear, I want to give the embryos a chance at real life, but I don't think the embryos have any intrinsic rights. I place immense value in them, and would prefer for them to become kids and help another couple, rather than die or remain frozen.

[Anonymous]

Are they adopting all six?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

OP here.

Let's suppose that a child created from our embryos feels the typical stresses that go along with a standard baby adoption. Except in unusual circumstances, that child is better off alive than hanging out in a petri dish, being thawed, being used for science, or undergoing a compassionate transfer.

Life is stressful, and frequently we don't get to choose the burdens we bear. If I could wave a magic wand, perhaps I'd take away a future kid's possible pain from knowing we donated him as an embryo. But I only have my inner guide that tells me that a future kid would appreciate being given a chance at life, even if that life involved some psychological discomfort.

In short: The donation may mean emotional pain for the future kid, and I'm OK with that because the kid will get a chance to live.

Am I getting to the heart of your question?

I'm an adoptive parent and as such, have read a lot about the pain some children who were adopted go through. It seems to be a minority viewpoint but I have read more than once about kids who felt they would rather have been aborted. In fact, I have a friend who was adopted who has such conflicting feelings she has said she wishes she'd never been born. Although she's an adoptive parent also so I truly don't understand exactly where she's coming from, but it's easy to see that the adoption (or rather, the relinquishment) has led to a lot of pain. She has recently (over 50 years old) learned about her birth family but has refused to contact them. It's tough. There are no easy answers. Don't know if this is at all analogous to donated embryos but it is quite facile to think you know how the future kids will fee.

OP here.

It would be terrible if a future kid would wish he/she had been aborted. How awful. My husband and I believe that's an unlikely outcome, though we could be wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you feel about the fact that you are likely creating a trauma for any kids that result from this "donation"? Any adoption, no matter how loving and secure, is a trauma for the child, knowing that his/her bio parents couldn't or wouldn't take care of him.

OP here.

Is this a serious question? Seems kinda troll-like.

OP did you research adoption at all before you did this?

OP here.

I researched adoption a bit, but only some of the issues overlap with embryo donation. Much of what's out there about baby adoption is somewhat off for this particular type of arrangement.

The agency provides a thorough set of FAQs for both the donors and adopters, and we read all of that info.

Here are two tremendous differences between baby adoption and embryo donation:

1. Our embryos aren't babies.
2. I won't carry the embryo until it becomes a baby.

I imagine that any future child will take heart in knowing that my husband and I didn't place him/her up for adoption. Rather, we're giving embryos a chance at becoming a baby.

I'm truly just a cell donor. The adopting mother will not only raise the child, by gestating a baby she will also create a biological link to the child. New-ish research shows that a gestational mother's DNA influences a baby's genes. Isn't that amazing!

\

If you truly don't think the embryos are babies, then I'm not sure why you're wading into this ethical quagmire. At the very least, it seems like you'd go into it with WAY lowered expectations for what kind of contact you'll have with the child.

NP, but can't you accept that there's a bit of grey area here in terms of emotions and biological relationships? I also don't believe that embryos are babies, but also can completely understand how one feels a connection to their embryos and can imagine a connection between her children (who she's raising) and the "could have been my child". OP seems to respect the the existing and potential human beings touched by this decision, and has made (in my opinion) a commendable decision to grant another couple the opportunity to be parents, while also helping to fill in the gaps that such a donation might leave in the resulting child's psyche.

I have a daughter conceived of by my own egg and husband's sperm, but a second child for us would mean DE. I'm actually leaning towards an embryo donation if we end up looking to expand our family, because I want my children to truly believe that the egg and sperm are ultimately minimal factors in the definition of family (for us, at least). Using just DE sends a more mixed message (like, genes don't matter and you're still Mom's child, but they kind of do, so we still wanted Dad's sperm). I'm still puzzling through all of this personally but I would welcome an opportunity to work with someone like OP to complete our family. (and I'm Jewish, so I appreciate the perspective of using a Christian agency when you're not actually Christian).

that's entirely too neat a viewpoint. yes, OP is commendable for deciding to donate to another family; but she's donating to a family that could afford to make their own embryos, so she's not actually giving them the "opportunity to be parents." and it's just a fantasy to think that OP can mitigate now any potential trauma caused by the adoption. she'd have more integrity if she admitted she doesn't know what the risk is, but thinks that the benefits of the children being created outweigh the risks to the child.

OP here.

For health reasons the adopting family can't make their own embryos.

Of course they can - they can purchase a donor egg and donor sperm.

[Anonymous]

Np here. I’m surprised. I didn’t know there were leftover embryos. I thought that once the embryos are made, if they are healthy, then they get implanted so that hopefully the woman becomes pregnant.