NationStates Jolt Archive

I recently found out that a couple I know is doing this. If you don't know what it is, here (http://www.embryoadoption.org/GenWhatIs.asp)is a site about it.

Embryo adoption is a relatively new process in which individuals who have frozen embryos that they do not plan on using to build their families agree to release the embryos for transfer to a recipient couple. The adopting family may either be known or anonymous to the donors. The intent is that the embryos will be transferred into the womb of the recipient mother, so that she and her husband may bear a child and be that childs parents.

Now, the couple I know believes that embryos are human life, and they are trying to rescue one from being discarded. They have no problem getting pregnant, but are doing this to save a baby.

My first thought when I originally heard about this was "cool, for a couple who can't get pregnant, this is another chance", but for a couple who has no trouble getting pregnant and just wants to adopt, I think this is kinda cruel, couldn't they adopt a child who is already born and needing a family now?

I am conflicted. I don't like that there are leftover babies that are being discarded, I also don't like the fact that there are unwanted children in the state's care that need adopted but are being passed over because people want babies.

I don't want a discussion about whether or not an embreyo is a baby, I am not passing judgement on this couple, it's their right to do what they want to.

I am only interested in what you think about embryo adoption in relation to a couple with fertility issues, and in one without fertility issues who just wants to adopt.

I saw a CSI show about this once.

I've seen too many people call those who want their own biological children selfish because 'there are many unwanted children to adopt'. That's a silly argument. So...only the irresponsible should have biological children, and abandon them for the responsible people to raise? Come on. In this case, this is the couple's choice, and I'm sure it's been made with a few considerations in mind:

- likely access to the medical history of the embryo's parents
- the desire to actually experience pregnancy
- being able to raise the adopted child from birth, which is something that is very difficult when adopting by other means (newborns are the most desired for adoptions, and therefore difficult to come by)

Their personal beliefs about the embryo being a baby are theirs. It's not a decision I would personally make, but neither do I consider it to be a bad choice in any way.

i think its a very generous thing for the bioparents of the embryos to do. i would think there would be some lingering feelings about having a child out there that you will never know. but to give a childless couple a chance to have their own child almost "from scratch" is a great kindness

these people you know at least have the conviction to put their money (and lives) where their mouths are. if they feel that these embryos are children who are going to end up killed (which they will be) its better to adopt one than it is to try to outlaw the creation of extra embryos. its an expensive way to make their point and perhaps the money could be better spent in other ways but at least they arent hypocrits.

if i were a person who was considering donating my unneeded frozen embryos to couples wanting one, i wouldnt release my embryos to them. i wouldnt be comfortable having them use my "child" as a political point.

Ridiculous. You know, many people who have to take fertility drugs end up with tons of embryos growing in their womb because the drugs release so many eggs. The doctors have to kill off some of them so the remaining ones will survive. It is very, VERY common. Why isn't anybody in an uproar about that?

Ridiculous. You know, many people who have to take fertility drugs end up with tons of embryos growing in their womb because the drugs release so many eggs. The doctors have to kill off some of them so the remaining ones will survive. It is very, VERY common. Why isn't anybody in an uproar about that?
beause a woman dutifullly having sex for the purpose of procreation (or having NO sex at all and being artificially inseminated or having premade embryos inserted into her uterus) leaves no chance to call her a slut.

no slut, no problem.

beause a woman dutifullly having sex for the purpose of procreation (or having NO sex at all and being artificially inseminated or having premade embryos inserted into her uterus) leaves no chance to call her a slut.

no slut, no problem.

Really! Is THAT what all the abortion uproar is about? Sluts? No wonder women's rights groups are up in arms about it.