Advertisements
Advertisements
Embryo Adoption (not donation) is a fertilized egg with no genetic match to either parent being born to people often who otherwise do not qualify for traditional adoption. This can be due to age, lack of funds ect. Even though the child will be born to the mother it will not look like either parent and be no different to a baby adopted at birth.
The donor family is usually a husband and wife who froze eggs due to cost and saving the mother from another extraction. When they have conceived all of the children they wish to have, a surplus is left over. The new term for this is "snowflake baby". They feel they don't wish to donate them to science or otherwise destroy them so they are placed for adoption. Contact between the families can be open or closed. Laws are not in place yet to oversee this.
The lack of knowledge of and definite relationship to one's genealogy, “genealogical bewilderment”, and which can result in the stunting of emotional development in children adopted at birth and can lead them to irrational rebellion against their adoptive parents and the world as a whole. Ignorance about their personal origin made adolescence more of a strain for adopted children than other children and genealogical bewilderment is a factor which frequently appears to be present in adoption stress.
Several other researchers found a predilection for impulsive behavior and acting out, antisocial symptoms in adopted children at birth. Adopted children often go through a stage of feeling like an outsider. He may fantasize about the person he would have been had he been raised by his "real " family. The child will think about his genetic parents everyday. This is true with knowing the parents and without in open and closed adoptions. When the child is asked who she looks like or how many brother or sisters he has. His cultural heritage may not be the same and his medical history will not match the parents.As the child becomes an adolescent he will have great difficulty establishing a sense of self because he will have no sense of his true history or heritage. He will not know who is supposed to be because he will not know his true origins if the adoption is closed or semi open. Not knowing another biological relative makes one feel like a misfit. The first relative most adoptees meet is their own child. The birth of a child in an adoptees life always brings the question..."how could I give this baby away"?
How would a person feel to know that they were not needed by their original family? That somewhere there is a loving mom, dad and full blood siblings that get to grow up with them while the child is born to a world where he or she should be grateful they were not destroyed. Would the donor mother feel the same if she carried the child to term and gave him away or is it a disconnection from a group of cells in a freezer? What if the child is abused or not told they are adopted? What if the adoptive family does not honor the open agreement?
The major issue here is cost. In most instances it is cheaper to create extra embryos and cheaper to adopt an embryo than a child.The Catholic Church is also debating this topic. In 2008, the Vatican released a major document on bioethics, “Dignitas Personae” (“The Dignity of a Person”), that reiterated the Catholic view that embryos should not be created in the lab and frozen, but added that embryo adoption is also not allowed. It is, the document said, “a situation of injustice which in fact cannot be resolved.” In the United States, Congress and the Bush administration gave $1 million to promote embryo adoption.
Embryo donation is legally considered a property transfer and not an adoption by state laws. However, Georgia enacted a statute called the "Option of Adoption Act" in 2009 which provided a procedure for couples to become eligible for the federal Adoption Tax Credit.
Embryo adoption is implanting cells which could not grow on their own. If not for artificial means would die on their own. They were intentionally created in a lab and can remain frozen indefinitely."All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights and are entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status." There will be no original birth certificate or hospital record should the donor recipient decide to not tell the person he or she is not adopted. If there is a flood, fire or unexpected death the identity of the adopted person's ancestors will be lost forever. Not telling people they are adopted is a bad practice. Less than 5% of modern adoptions are closed. The sealing of birth records is a short lived, bad practice that caused unnecessary suffering.
There is also a new way to choose the donor egg and donor sperm thus intentionally creating an orphan with no intention of ever being used for the genetic parents. Some couple choose this because they want to be on equal footing as far a being related to their child. If your personal or religious views support embryo donation as an alternative to destroying the embryo you must consider that creating a human being with no relation to either parent in a closed adoption who wouldn't exist otherwise is morally wrong and reprehensible. Enter the "designer baby" who is destined to be top of the class, have hair, eyes and other physical characteristics that fit his or her parents' wish list.The main objection to the procedure is that it opens the door to a world of unethical possibilities. A very slippery slope for future generations.
Adopted children face loss in the most loving of homes. Our ancestors and family history help give us a sense of belonging and define who we are. Adoption is a life-long issue that deals with identity and the broken thread of family continuity. Being adopted is not always a better life, but a different one. One must decide if embryo donation is adoption or it isn't. If the embryo is a person for abortion issues it must have the same rights for embryo donation issues. One must put their own wants and needs aside and consider the dignity of an adopted person even if he or she is only in the beginning stages of life.
This is SUCH a fascinating topic! I feel like I could muse on it all day ...
My husband and I never did IVF, as we chose to do adoption instead. However, I do know a lot about it and I just wanted to point out that I think it's incorrect to assume that couples undergoing fertility treatments just make lots of extra embryos to save money and avoid multiple extractions.
When a woman undergoes hormone injections, there is no way to control how many follicles she will produce. The goal is 10-20 but sometimes she will only make three and sometimes nine, etc. The goal is 10-20 because IVF is a numbers game in the truest sense. You might extract fifteen follicles, but only nine of them contain viable eggs. Of those nine maybe only six fertilize. Of those six maybe only four make it to day three. Of those four maybe only three make it to day five. You implant two and are left with one. You freeze it. If you get pregnant and don't miscarry, you have a "snow baby" left over. If you don't get pregnant or if you miscarry, you have the ability to try again without doing a full on fresh cycle, which is very expensive, time consuming, emotionally draining, and very hard on your body. I have never known a couple (and I was involved in a huge online fertility community for years) who purposely created more embryos than they needed. So, I just wanted to clarify that.
From my perspective, the main problem here is a lack of education. When my husband and I started the adoption process, our agency required and provided a lot of education. We had to read books about the affects of adoption on children, we met and spoke with both adoptive parents and birth parents. We went to (and still go to) monthly support meetings. We had weekend intensives where our eyes were opened to the myriad complications of adoption. We were counseled on the importance of being honest and open with our children from day one, and given help and guidance on how to do this. We learned how to talk with friends and families and what "positive adoption language" is. We get help navigating open adoptions and the complicated relationships within them. We receive lifelong counseling whenever we need it. It's all pretty awesome (love my agency!).
HOWEVER, when you are on the "fertility treadmill" as it's often referred to, your doctor presents you with escalating options. First there is testing, then there is drugs, then there is IUI, then there is IVF, then there is donor sperm, then there is donor embryo. They present it just like it's the next thing you do on the road to trying to have a family. There is very little education, and often none! To me, that's what's really crazy!!
Who knows how clueless I may have been if when I began down the road of adoption I was just handed a baby and that was that? I think it is appalling that people are not educated about all that adoption entails and are just offered someone else's embryo as if it's no big deal at all. I think it's tragic that doctors offer these options as if they are just the next step in treatment, and nothing more.
My little sister-in-law, who is only 16, was conceived using a donor embryo. She wasn't told until she was 13, and she's having all kinds of challenges now. It breaks my heart and makes me mad! Mad at the doctors and mad at her parents. I don't have a strong view on whether this kind of reproduction in general is moral or ok or not I think there are strong arguments to be made on both sides. But I do have a very strong view that if it is to take place then there should be education for the parents on both sides in place, and there should be laws protecting the records of the children conceived in this way, and that they should have full access to their stories and their genetic identities from day one.
Advertisements
I'm glad you understand. No one intends to make snowflake babies but just like the possibility of multiples and selective reduction a plan needs to be in place prior to freezing an embryo. When you start talking about bringing in an egg or sperm it is becomes an adoption and it is not the same as just having help conceiving your own.
Sometimes the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one. This is true for organ donation or right to die issues. If everyone donated organs there would be plenty to go around but less than 10 percent get a donor organ before they die. When the time comes the decision isn't easy to make for your family member.
I am currently going through the process of getting pregnant by embryo donation (I do not consider it an adoption). It will be a little different than you describe in that the program I am using does not use leftover frozen embryos from other fertility patients, but rather creates fresh embryos using donated egg and donated sperm. However, these are not "designer babies". The donors are not selected based on their looks, intelligence or any other "desirable" traits.
I know many people have ethical issues with embryo donation in general, and even more so with the type that I am doing where the embryo is being created specifically to be donated. I also know many people don't have ethical issues with it. And that is the problem with trying to apply ethics and morals to situations like this. Who gets to decide what is ethical or moral? The legislature? The Catholic church? The group that shouts the loudest and protests the most? When you say "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one" which "many" are you talking about? The children created from these embryos? Have you polled them to see how many would rather have never been born?
Modern technology certainly has given us new and interesting ways to create families. And with it a host of new ethical considerations to think about, but I don't think you will ever reach a consensus about what is or is not ethical when it comes to these new technologies. Even amongst those whose opinion should matter the most, the children created by these methods, I doubt you will ever get a consensus. In the end, I think it just needs to be left up to each individual to decide what is right for them and their family.
JackieN
[QUOTE]I am currently going through the process of getting pregnant by embryo donation (I do not consider it an adoption). It will be a little different than you describe in that the program I am using does not use leftover frozen embryos from other fertility patients, but rather creates fresh embryos using donated egg and donated sperm. However, these are not "designer babies". The donors are not selected based on their looks, intelligence or any other "desirable" traits.
Jackie - do you honestly believe this? That companies don't screen "donors" before they put them in the profile databases complete with details about them including pictures and statistics? That couples/individuals do not then go through profiles of "donors" and select the one they want to use? That companies solicitating women to provide "donor" eggs don't target the women at universities and require their GPA and other desireable traits to be documented and pictures of the women taken? And that companies that have "donor" embryos available have not selected the gametes based on the same process as above before creating those embryos?
I know many people have ethical issues with embryo donation in general, and even more so with the type that I am doing where the embryo is being created specifically to be donated. I also know many people don't have ethical issues with it. And that is the problem with trying to apply ethics and morals to situations like this. Who gets to decide what is ethical or moral? The legislature? The Catholic church? The group that shouts the loudest and protests the most? When you say "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one" which "many" are you talking about? The children created from these embryos? Have you polled them to see how many would rather have never been born?
Actually the question should be how many adult donor conceived have you sought out. Those with opinions on both sides of the fence. Using a fallacious argument doesn't work on adoptees, because it is only used to shut down the voice.
Modern technology certainly has given us new and interesting ways to create families. And with it a host of new ethical considerations to think about, but I don't think you will ever reach a consensus about what is or is not ethical when it comes to these new technologies. Even amongst those whose opinion should matter the most, the children created by these methods, I doubt you will ever get a consensus. In the end, I think it just needs to be left up to each individual to decide what is right for them and their family.
Perhaps the ART industry should have focused more on learning from the past in adoption, before repeating the same mistakes that did not need to happen in the first place.
Kind regards,
Dickons
Dickons
Jackie - do you honestly believe this? That companies don't screen "donors" before they put them in the profile databases complete with details about them including pictures and statistics? That couples/individuals do not then go through profiles of "donors" and select the one they want to use? That companies solicitating women to provide "donor" eggs don't target the women at universities and require their GPA and other desireable traits to be documented and pictures of the women taken? And that companies that have "donor" embryos available have not selected the gametes based on the same process as above before creating those embryos?
Of course some companies choose their donors this way. The one I am going through does not. They select their donors based only on health issues that could make the procedure unsafe for the woman or affect the baby. They do not require pictures or GPAs. When I am "matched", I will get the donor profile and it will state such things as hair color, eye color, etc. For some people, choosing a donor that looks like them is important. It is not for me. The profile might also include information like occupation, interests, etc. That too is not very important to me, although it is for some people. This is a far cry from "designer babies" who are "destined to be top of their class" as described in the OP's initial post.
Dickons
Actually the question should be how many adult donor conceived have you sought out. Those with opinions on both sides of the fence. Using a fallacious argument doesn't work on adoptees, because it is only used to shut down the voice.
I haven't ever met any as donor embryos are a relatively new thing; however, I do know several adoptees, including my niece who is the happiest, most well-adjusted teenager that I've ever had the pleasure of knowing. None of the adoptees that I personally know have major issues with being adopted. I know in the wider world, some adoptees do have issues of varying degrees. Some don't give their adoptions a second thought. And still some make it the centerpost of their lives and let it destroy them. I doubt many would say that they'd rather have never been born then to deal with whatever issues they do have. When we are talking embryo donation, "having never been born" is really the only other option.
I can relate a situation in my own life that has absolutely nothing to do with adoption, but does make the point that I'm trying to make. My mother was born with a genetic muscular disease that made her "walk funny" and left her unable to do many of the physical things that other children could do. Only she didn't know she had this disease because her own mother was emotionally abusive and just told her "you're too stupid" to do those things.
When I was 7 years old, she was in a car accident and during the treatment for this accident, her muscular disease was discovered. I was with her in the exam room when the doctor gave her the diagnosis. I remember how happy my mother was to finally know that she wasn't just "too stupid." She didn't even lose her happiness when the doctor explained that her condition was progressive and that the pain in her arms and legs would worsen with age, that she would gradually lose strength and finger dexterity in her hands, and that she would likely someday need a wheelchair. She was just so happy to know that she wasn't "too stupid." I will also always remember the words the doctor said as we were leaving the room that quickly deflated my mom's happiness, "it's too bad you didn't know about this before you had children. You probably would have considered not having them." His words sent chills down my spine then, and they still do today. In two sentences he told her that her life wasn't worth living and that she may have doomed us to a similar fate.
3 of my mom's 4 kids ended up having her genetic disorder. I happen to be the one who doesn't. I watched my mom slowly get worse to the point that she was in pain and needed a wheelchair most of the time, but she never lost her zest for life. She died last year following a battle with cancer/stroke after living a fulfilling and happy life. I now watch as my two sisters (my brother died as a teenger due to unrelated reasons) deal with the same issues, both knowing that they will only get worse with time. I know neither of them regrets their life or wishes that they had never been born. My one sister even had two kids of her own, knowing that they may be inflicted with this same condition. They are now 15 and 10 and quite happy, although it is too soon to tell if they have inherited the bad genes. Some people would say that she should never have had them. I'm pretty sure that they would disagree.
My point is that we all have issues that we have to deal with. Some worse then others. But not many of us would say that our issues make life unbearable and not having been born would have been a better option. Do you really think that the future children born from these donated embryos would regret their births regardless of whatever issues they had to deal with? I'm guessing most would get chills down their spine if they knew we were even debating their right to exist.
Advertisements
Do you really think that the future children born from these donated embryos would regret their births regardless of whatever issues they had to deal with?
Jackie - fallacious arguments don't work on me.
Kind regards,
Dickons
Dickons is right. You will be the surrogate for the adopted child. There was a poll taken of existing adopted people. 6 out of ten adopted people wish that they had never been concieved or born. Not be confused with depression or suicide. It was a disproportionate number compared to the general population.
You should consider that while this child will not expierence the loss of the mother in infacncy they will still face the loss of not growing up with their genetic family. Growing up adopted is a trauma. Mahnie is right. Adoption is a different path.
My husband and I have been trying for a baby for 3 years. I know the pain of infertility and we just signed up to do iui. Even this is causing me grief because of my adoption loss. If you don't want a child who has another family and can not admit that this is an adoption....than you should do more research.
Using a snowflake baby is one thing. If couples are using a donor egg at they should at least use the husbands sperm. To intentionally make a a not relative baby ???? Where is the outcry for this ? Waiting children on foster care websites and frozen embryos already exist. Consider the dignity of the adopted person.
Seriously Christine, where do you get your so called "facts" from your "polls" and information?
It's so damaging to present your OPINIONS as facts and statements for others and it really does need to stop. Speak your mind, that's fine. But quit telling others how to think and attacking them for their views. It's not ok.