Abortion debates and IVF clinics.

[year2late]

I have asked this on multiple threads and left with lackluster (IMHO) responses.

We have a very vocal contingency in this country and indeed this forum that believe that non implanted zygotes/blastocysts are fully equal to a air breathing crying baby.

Many cycles of IVF leave "leftovers" - sometimes to the deep freeze, other times destroyed. (and of course there is embryonic stem cell research), Why does this contingency not go after the IVF clinics with as much fervor as they go What do they think happens to the blastocysts after it is found out that they are with genetic diseases? Seriously? Wouldn't the destruction of those genetically damaged blastocysts be a horrendous murder of the handicapped? Perhaps eugenics at the purest level?

Why is Planned Parenthood singled out while IVF is allowed go along relatively unscathed? (I am not saying never, but relatively speaking)

 

[Removable Mind]

I have asked this on multiple threads and left with lackluster (IMHO) responses.

We have a very vocal contingency in this country and indeed this forum that believe that non implanted zygotes/blastocysts are fully equal to a air breathing crying baby.

Many cycles of IVF leave "leftovers" - sometimes to the deep freeze, other times destroyed. (and of course there is embryonic stem cell research), Why does this contingency not go after the IVF clinics with as much fervor as they go What do they think happens to the blastocysts after it is found out that they are with genetic diseases? Seriously? Wouldn't the destruction of those genetically damaged blastocysts be a horrendous murder of the handicapped? Perhaps eugenics at the purest level?

Why is Planned Parenthood singled out while IVF is allowed go along relatively unscathed? (I am not saying never, but relatively speaking)

You do bring up some good ethical points and I suggest that right now...opinions that non-implanted zygotes and blastocysts are equal to a born child....is nothing short of a personal belief, not applicable to law. And of course you know that.

There's already several states who have attempted to implement personhood laws that have all failed.

If personhood was ever granted to the all stages of the unborn, then all that you've commented on regarding IVF clinics active practice would become nonexistent. Stem cell research using any stage of human life...would become seriously against the law. Left in the wake of a constitutional amendment which described in detail all elements of human life, starting a fertilization, be considered as a "legal person"...there would be a hell storm of lawsuits hit the court systems across the nation in which the fate of untold thousands of embryos would have to be decided.

Controlling the fate of non-implanted zygotes and blastocysts might be more complex, but they too would be considered a person...with all the rights of the born.

It would be a huge mistake to grant personhood to any stage of the unborn. There would be substantial unintended consequences should personhood be granted to all stages of the unborn.

 

[year2late]

I agree it is a belief and not law. But look at the states that have tried to make this a legal distinction.

And yet they yell kick and scream about Planned Parenthood, but they lay silent on the IVF clinics.

I just want them to come out and either spew at them as well....or acknowledge they are just hypocrites.

But my guess is there will be some self serving special loophole just for their convenience.

 

[minnie616]

I also have a hard time understanding why pro life people have a double standard whe it comes to IVF clinics.

I sometimes think their stance is more about controlling women than the fact they think an embryo is a baby.

 

[nota bene]

The disgusting point of this thread is to insinuate that those who are pro-life are hypocrites if they are not protesting about the disposal of frozen embryos. Maybe it's one goal at a time, ladies. Maybe there are only so many hours in a day too and thus one must choose his or her battles.

I don't speak for anybody else, but I have no "double standard." I am opposed to IVF because of the "culling" process and because so many embryos are ultimately discarded. This is morally repugnant.

Happily, however, there may be at least partial solutions on the horizon.

Embryo Donation/Adoption: Medical, Legal and Ethical Perspectives - ISPUB

 

[choiceone]

I think that, from the pro-life viewpoint, one should probably be more opposed to IVF than to abortion. Abortions are sometimes performed to save the life of the woman, after all, or to save her major health functions or because she was impregnated by rape. But when IVF occurs, scientists deliberately make more embryos than they plan to implant and, when they do implant, they implant more than they plan for the woman to keep pregnant with and usually ask her which they should remove (since growing them all would result in serious problems for most or all of them). That is, they know at the time they are deliberately making the embryos that they will want to discard some.

I'm not actually against IVF, because I do not share the view that human zygotes and blastocysts are human beings that have human rights which should be recognized. Nonetheless, if I were pro-life, I would be very much more against IVF than against abortion simply because of the above.

 

[year2late]

The disgusting point of this thread is to insinuate that those who are pro-life are hypocrites if they are not protesting about the disposal of frozen embryos. Maybe it's one goal at a time, ladies. Maybe there are only so many hours in a day too and thus one must choose his or her battles.

I don't speak for anybody else, but I have no "double standard." I am opposed to IVF because of the "culling" process and because so many embryos are ultimately discarded. This is morally repugnant.

Happily, however, there may be at least partial solutions on the horizon.

Embryo Donation/Adoption: Medical, Legal and Ethical Perspectives - ISPUB

Seriously though, we had an entire hate thread on eugenics. What else is IVF with genetic testing other than eugenics in its perfect form? "kill" the inferior "baby" (er uh blastocyst) and save the strong.

Come on!

Not saying right or wrong, just saying a current day eugenics program compared to a woman 90 years ago saying some crap and her organization has nothing to do with those words?

Stop the flipping hypocrisy.

 

[mariagomzan]

i thought about abortion: one abortion is equal to one Death which means you kill humans...

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

I have asked this on multiple threads and left with lackluster (IMHO) responses.

We have a very vocal contingency in this country and indeed this forum that believe that non implanted zygotes/blastocysts are fully equal to a air breathing crying baby.

Many cycles of IVF leave "leftovers" - sometimes to the deep freeze, other times destroyed. (and of course there is embryonic stem cell research), Why does this contingency not go after the IVF clinics with as much fervor as they go What do they think happens to the blastocysts after it is found out that they are with genetic diseases? Seriously? Wouldn't the destruction of those genetically damaged blastocysts be a horrendous murder of the handicapped? Perhaps eugenics at the purest level?

Why is Planned Parenthood singled out while IVF is allowed go along relatively unscathed? (I am not saying never, but relatively speaking)

I completely agree. It's baffling.

They're driven nearly to distraction by abortion, and yet I've never heard any of them start a serious conversation about the destruction of embryos during IVF. In fact, many support it, because they just generally support natalism, even at the expense of the "lives" they're so concerned about.

A single round of IVF can kill half a dozen embryos. You'll be hard pressed to find a woman who's had half a dozen abortions.

And yet, they are mysteriously silent on the issue.

I think it goes back to what the real issue is: a lot of the time, what they're really arguing against is women who don't want to reproduce. The fact that IVF expresses a desire to reproduce calms that fervor, even though they are ultimately ending quite a large number of "lives" in the process of doing so.

 

[minnie616]

?...

Happily, however, there may be at least partial solutions on the horizon.

Embryo Donation/Adoption: Medical, Legal and Ethical Perspectives - ISPUB

So, according to the article the partial solution you are so happy about will find adoptive " homes " for 2 percent of the donor embryos.

I find it interesting only 2 percent of the couples will release one or more of their unused embryos for adoption.
That is about the same number of women who continue their pregnancies so they can give a baby up for adoption.

 

[year2late]

I completely agree. It's baffling.

They're driven nearly to distraction by abortion, and yet I've never heard any of them start a serious conversation about the destruction of embryos during IVF. In fact, many support it, because they just generally support natalism, even at the expense of the "lives" they're so concerned about.

A single round of IVF can kill half a dozen embryos. You'll be hard pressed to find a woman who's had half a dozen abortions.

And yet, they are mysteriously silent on the issue.

I think it goes back to what the real issue is: a lot of the time, what they're really arguing against is women who don't want to reproduce. The fact that IVF expresses a desire to reproduce calms that fervor, even though they are ultimately ending quite a large number of "lives" in the process of doing so.

Not just that, there was supreme craziness on DP over Sanger and her beliefs on eugenics and how that negatively impacts PP 9ndecades later. The were quick to bring up Sanger and failed to connect it to modern day society. Yet they lay silent about the leftover blastocysts that will never be implanted and are tossed or just kept in deep freeze. ANd they lay even more silent on the eugenics in its purest form.....genetic testing during IVF process and tossing the inferior BABIES.

 

[year2late]

So, according to the article the partial solution you are so happy about will find adoptive " homes " for 2 percent of the donor embryos.

I find it interesting only 2 percent of the couples will release one or more of their unused embryos for adoption.
That is about the same number of women who continue their pregnancies so they can give a baby up for adoption.

Can you imagine the implications of widespread donation of leftover blastocysts?

You could have a dozen brothers and sisters and not even know it. Hell, you could marry your own sibling and never know it.:shock:

 

[Removable Mind]

Can you imagine the implications of widespread donation of leftover blastocysts?

You could have a dozen brothers and sisters and not even know it. Hell, you could marry your own sibling and never know it.:shock:

You certainly have a valid point, Y2L. After reading some posts by a few...there is a suspicion that they are possibly children of siblings who have married.

 

[minnie616]

Can you imagine the implications of widespread donation of leftover blastocysts?

You could have a dozen brothers and sisters and not even know it. Hell, you could marry your own sibling and never know it.:shock:

Actually I had thought about that.
There have been some fictional TV shows about that type of scenario...not so fictional anymore if it became widespread.

 

[choiceone]

i thought about abortion: one abortion is equal to one Death which means you kill humans...

Saying "no" to sex with a man has the same result. Wanna legislate that it's okay to rape women?

 

[year2late]

Actually I had thought about that.
There have been some fictional TV shows about that type of scenario...not so fictional anymore if it became widespread.

At least with sperm donation, there is little to no chance of having a full fledged brother or sister that is out there.

WIth donation, we are talking genetic material from the same parents.

 

[kerussll]

IVF is generally done by rich, white, married women. It's harder to think of them as skanks deserving of judgment and punishment.

 

[year2late]

IVF is generally done by rich, white, married women. It's harder to think of them as skanks deserving of judgment and punishment.

Given the fact that many antiabortion people are going after pre-implantation as well (to the point of not wanting) morning after pill or BCP or IUD it is amazing that they don't jump on this....but you may be onto something. It is funny...the same people were crazy over the thought of embryonic stem cell research because it was "life" but lay silent as the same cells were thrown away.

But seriously, I have to wonder if you are onto something.

 

[kerussll]

Given the fact that many antiabortion people are going after pre-implantation as well (to the point of not wanting) morning after pill or BCP or IUD it is amazing that they don't jump on this....but you may be onto something. It is funny...the same people were crazy over the thought of embryonic stem cell research because it was "life" but lay silent as the same cells were thrown away.

But seriously, I have to wonder if you are onto something.

Yeah, for a lot of these people it has absolutely nothing to do with saving a baby's life. It's about punishing a woman for assumed behavior they don't approve of. It's pretty lame really.