Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:[b]Anonymous wrote:If it makes you feel better, OP, the gestational mother’s DNA does indirectly contribute to any embryo implanted within her, as it’s her genes that determine whether or not certain genes in the fetus get “switched on” or not. MicroRNA is what you’d want to google if interested[b]
In short, you’ll have a biological connection to the baby regardless. I’m not sure it would even be “fair,” then, to try to ensure your husband doesn’t have one.
Sorry but this isn’t a big deal. Epigenetics gets blown way out of proportion in the infertility world in order to make women feel they have more impact on the baby than they actually do.
Agree. And I think men tend to use that argument with women to have them use donor eggs. The fact of the matter is that it is my fertility that was ruined - not his - by his actions - delaying years.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP, you have no way of knowing that your are infertile because your husband dragged his feet. You might have had issues if you started earlier too. You shouldn’t deny him having biological children because you can’t. (If you want donor embryos for other reasons that is a different story)
So, now considering adoption is “denying” him children? This is very misogynistic. I love how everyone insists it’s not his fault for making her wait until she could no longer have biological children. Now, simply considering adopt is “denying” him something. Pick a side, at least be consistent.
Anonymous wrote:[b]Anonymous wrote:If it makes you feel better, OP, the gestational mother’s DNA does indirectly contribute to any embryo implanted within her, as it’s her genes that determine whether or not certain genes in the fetus get “switched on” or not. MicroRNA is what you’d want to google if interested[b]
In short, you’ll have a biological connection to the baby regardless. I’m not sure it would even be “fair,” then, to try to ensure your husband doesn’t have one.
Sorry but this isn’t a big deal. Epigenetics gets blown way out of proportion in the infertility world in order to make women feel they have more impact on the baby than they actually do.
Anonymous wrote:If it makes you feel better, OP, the gestational mother’s DNA does indirectly contribute to any embryo implanted within her, as it’s her genes that determine whether or not certain genes in the fetus get “switched on” or not. MicroRNA is what you’d want to google if interested[b]
In short, you’ll have a biological connection to the baby regardless. I’m not sure it would even be “fair,” then, to try to ensure your husband doesn’t have one.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP, you have no way of knowing that your are infertile because your husband dragged his feet. You might have had issues if you started earlier too. You shouldn’t deny him having biological children because you can’t. (If you want donor embryos for other reasons that is a different story)
So, now considering adoption is “denying” him children? This is very misogynistic. I love how everyone insists it’s not his fault for making her wait until she could no longer have biological children. Now, simply considering adopt is “denying” him something. Pick a side, at least be consistent.
I was in the same situation, so I do understand. BUT THERE IS A CHILD INVOLVED. Imagine explaining to the child that you were pissed at your husband for making you wait, so you forced him to agree to use an donor embryo so you'd be "even" so now your child will wonder about BOTH their bio mother and bio father. Doesn't bode well for a healthy relationship once your kid understands things. Yes, OP should be pissed, but it's no excuse for using the child as the chip to get even. Adoption is great, and certainly a possible answer to OP's situation. It would be wonderful to give a living child a loving family AND have OP feel good about the relative relationships that she and her husband have with the child. But don't pretend that embryo adoption is the same as adopting a living child (unless you truly believe that the embryo is no different than a newborn - and I think very few people around here do - you'd have to be hard core anti-abortion even in cases of rape and incest).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP, you have no way of knowing that your are infertile because your husband dragged his feet. You might have had issues if you started earlier too. You shouldn’t deny him having biological children because you can’t. (If you want donor embryos for other reasons that is a different story)
So, now considering adoption is “denying” him children? This is very misogynistic. I love how everyone insists it’s not his fault for making her wait until she could no longer have biological children. Now, simply considering adopt is “denying” him something. Pick a side, at least be consistent.
Anonymous wrote:OP, you have no way of knowing that your are infertile because your husband dragged his feet. You might have had issues if you started earlier too. You shouldn’t deny him having biological children because you can’t. (If you want donor embryos for other reasons that is a different story)
Anonymous wrote:OP, you have no way of knowing that your are infertile because your husband dragged his feet. You might have had issues if you started earlier too. You shouldn’t deny him having biological children because you can’t. (If you want donor embryos for other reasons that is a different story)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Maybe some counseling? This is a big decision. You have no idea who the parents are in donor embryo. At least you know your baby will be half your DH. If you are not comfortable with that maybe you should stay with one and done.
+1
Why in the world wouldn't you want your DH to be the father of your child?
Anonymous wrote:Maybe some counseling? This is a big decision. You have no idea who the parents are in donor embryo. At least you know your baby will be half your DH. If you are not comfortable with that maybe you should stay with one and done.