171
172

RANTDislike IVF (self.childfree)

Dsxm41780CF dude in the USA が 投稿

Hello. New to this sub. 36 yo male, married 12.5 years, Childfree. Full disclosure, I am a teacher, have worked with kids for 22 years, and love my god daughters.

Is it me or does anyone else find IVF and other fertility treatments completely wasteful? Some people's bodies are not meant to handle children and they should accept that. If they want children so bad, they should adopt or become foster parents. I don't like my insurance premiums going up because every infertile Myrtle wants to have their precious genetic spawn.

I have many friends that have been through it and I've supported them through it, but I wish it would be illegal to have insurance cover it or any part of it.

全 108 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]chillyfeets23F | Implanon | 3 Cats 120ポイント121ポイント  (12子コメント)

You think insurance coverage is bad? Australian government actually subsidizes the cost. And I find it to be complete and utter bullshit that they do - I want my taxes to go to something actually important.

I think it's the height of selfishness to go through IVF instead of adoption. Why spend tens of thousands of dollars on this when it's not guaranteed to work, when there's thousands of children out there already, that are alone and unloved.

Why not give them a life?

[–]Boneal171 67ポイント68ポイント  (3子コメント)

I totally agree, frankly I find IVF narcissistic. I mean why is it so important to have a kid with their genetics and DNA? Honestly what is so great about that person/people? If someone is that baby or child crazy they should adopt or become foster parents like you said there are so many unwanted children in the world and its already over populated enough as it is. I think IVF is narcissistic a waste of money and just plain ridiculous.

[–]VeritasEtVenia25/F/In a Relationship 25ポイント26ポイント  (2子コメント)

But they want a bayyyybeee, not a kid with issues. Reality check - we all have issues, and you'll make your own kid have issues too. And then that unadopted kid with issues still exists.

People are ridiculous. IVF is extra ridiculous to me.

[–]Hugsfortheunloved 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

Agreed. I could have had a kid if I had Ivf but its one of the biggest reasons I'm cf, ivf is an awful process. My bf at the time refused point blank to consider adoptiokn or fostering, something I may do later in life. I was told there was decreased chance of a natural baby within three years n virtually no chance after five. That was eight years ago. Ha!

[–]bananasfriedchicken 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Someone I knew stopped taking bc because she her IuD left scar tissues. Doc told her 1/million chance she'll get pregnant. Guess who's pregnant...

[–]BewilderedFingers27/F/Not doing it for Denmark 19ポイント20ポイント  (2子コメント)

UK does too, although they also cover abortions under the NHS. I hate when people whine about tax money going towards abortions but if Bob and Susan want baby number 5 but have issues then it's fine they get IVF paid for.

[–]hephepheptothejive 13ポイント14ポイント  (1子コメント)

Tbf you can only get IVF on the NHS if you don't already have kids. I don't agree with it though. The NHS should cure health problems like pregnancy, not spend thousands of pounds causing them.

[–]BewilderedFingers27/F/Not doing it for Denmark 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I looked it up but it didn't say exactly what the requirements to be eligible were, that's something at least.

[–]Dsxm41780CF dude in the USA[S] 10ポイント11ポイント  (2子コメント)

Agreed and thanks for the info about Australia. One of my good friends growing up had adopted and foster siblings. His parents took in the ones people didn't want: teens, developmentally challenged, POC, etc so I try to advocate for foster care and adoption when I can.

DW & I have discussed in the past that if we ever gave up the CF lifestyle, we would look into adoption, or give foster parenting a try.

[–]chillyfeets23F | Implanon | 3 Cats 13ポイント14ポイント  (1子コメント)

I've always said if I change my mind then I'll seek adoption. I don't want to pass on my shitty genes regardless.

[–]Dsxm41780CF dude in the USA[S] 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

Haha, yes. I'm not concerned about bringing an overweight hairy kid into the world at risk for cancer, heart disease, and diabetes.

[–]Furah20s/M/Au/Ladies, I'm single. ;) 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

Shit, we do? :(

No! Bad government! Bad! grabs spray bottle

[–]bananasfriedchicken 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is how I feel too. So many kids up for adoption but oh no! Gotta have a little you!!

[–]Rans_Wolves"Well, excuse me for being a mere mortal!" 40ポイント41ポイント  (4子コメント)

I've started hearing for the first time recently that IVF is dangerous to the mother. Honestly, I'm inclined to agree with you about the insurance, because it affects everyone. And maybe if people stopped treating having genetic offspring like it's the only event in life that matters, there wouldn't be such a stigma towards infertility. Maybe more people would adopt first instead of focusing on endangering themselves with IVF first.

If I'm totally unapologetic and honest, I do think it's insane and kind of sickening to put a woman's health in danger just so she can have one baby instead of another (genetic instead of adopted).

But I'm hardly in any position to judge. If I found out I was infertile tomorrow I would literally celebrate with a cake and everything. It's true that I can't possibly understand what it feels like to want to have a baby, and therefore, fair to say I'm incapable of understanding the emotional pain that infertile women experience.

[–]Dsxm41780CF dude in the USA[S] 15ポイント16ポイント  (1子コメント)

It is dangerous to the mothers. They can severely damage their ovaries.

As I said, I have friends that have been through it and I have supported them because that's what friends do, but with the cost of health care these days, this isn't something everyone should be on the hook for.

[–]AncientGates35/f/CF/Married/Tubal 11ポイント12ポイント  (0子コメント)

It is dangerous to the mothers. They can severely damage their ovaries.

This is what happened to my friend. She got something called "OHSS" or "Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome" and ended up completely bedridden for a month. It's a hell of a lot more dangerous than people are led to believe.

Even "just" freezing some eggs can cause some seriously messed up shit, but people act like it's risk free to donate/store eggs or get IVF done.

[–]abqkatno tubes, no problems 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's true that I can't possibly understand what it feels like to want to have a baby

This is a very sensitive and important thing to remember. Like you, I cannot know what it's like to want a baby. In that way, I can't relate and have never experienced the yearning to reproduce that so many women feel.

Then again, I don't have testicles, yet know that kicking them is likely not a good thing. Hah. But really, it's important to remember that different people choose IVF for all kinds of reasons. It doesn't mean we have to accept it or think it a worthwhile endeavor, but it's important to try to understand others' POV's, too

[–]BonBonGrayCat 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

And maybe if people stopped treating having genetic offspring like it's the only event in life that matters, there wouldn't be such a stigma towards infertility. Maybe more people would adopt first instead of focusing on endangering themselves with IVF first.

THIS.

[–]Phog91Dogs>Babies 47ポイント48ポイント  (8子コメント)

So I'm adopted and I'm of the notion that if people want to have their own kids, fuck it, whatever, go for it. But once you get into the tens of thousands of dollars trying to have kids biologically, you should be cut off. Either adopt, or don't have kids. It sickens me that people will spend upwards of 20 grand to get pregnant when that could help so many other children who ALREADY EXIST.

[–]misskarcrashiantravelling the world 14ポイント15ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is what I want to do with my life when I'm older, adopt all these 17 year olds that go in and out of my house and basically motivate them for college, saving money, etc. The kids who age out of adoption system and end up homeless is a disturbing statistic. Why not take care of the humans already here before creating more?

[–]HuiTerios22F: cats and video games > kids 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

Though I'm very much in the childfree camp, I have a backup plan of adoption (maybe of an older child) if I somehow feel the desire to have a kid. Or I'll be a teacher. Maybe the latter since I can still help kids while not having to deal with them 24/7.

[–]Dsxm41780CF dude in the USA[S] 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

Becoming a teacher will solidify the CF tendencies, trust me!

[–]abqkatno tubes, no problems 7ポイント8ポイント  (4子コメント)

upwards of 20 grand

However, adoption is no cheap feat, either. Adoption is alarmingly cost prohibitive and many couples that choose IVF did so because it's nearly as long and drawn out AND expensive as adoption, unfortunately :(

[–]mangababe 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

But the other factors are still there. Less people on the earth and improving a life that already exists still stands.

[–]abqkatno tubes, no problems 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

True, but those are our ideals and values, not everyone's. I agree with you, but to assign that belief to others or assume that, frankly, they care about a life that already exists is, IMO, a slippery slope.

[–]mangababe 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Absolutely

But in all honesty I have no respect for someone who would rather bring a child into a world as shitty as this instead of taking a child already here and improving their life.

I know those are my beliefs, and i don't expect others to hold them, but I can't help but think it.

Oh. You want to add more to this??? OK...

[–]chair_ee 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

You actually get paid to adopt through foster care. It's just that no one wants do that bc fostering is "too hard" and you're not guaranteed a healthy white baby of your preferred gender.

[–]abqkatno tubes, no problems 47ポイント48ポイント  (7子コメント)

I'm adopted. All 6 of my siblings are adopted. That NO DOUBT thwarts my views on IVF and surrogacy and such, but, like OP and likely others, there's just something about it that's... over-the-top to me. Or something. I can't explain my position exactly, but there's something about it that makes me shudder

Anecdotally, of the 4 IVF babies I know, 3 have developmental disorders, and the other has a growth disorder - that cannot be a coincidence. Now... I'd never offer my opinions to people aloud because they are somehow crude or whatever, but I cannot, in any capacity, respect IVF as a practice. And to think that insurance would pay for that is, to me, unreasonable.

[–]Yngvi_Freyr 13ポイント14ポイント  (1子コメント)

of the 4 IVF babies I know, 3 have developmental disorders, and the other has a growth disorder

That's something odd, I also know 4 IVF babies and 3 of them have problems:

Couple A: She is fine, he is fine, but after years trying to conceive without success, they try several cycles of IVF, finally, she get pregnant with twins. When they were babies everything was normal, but as they get older (2 or 3 years old), it's obvious they are "different", they don't react like other kids. Right now, they never talk about their children, like never, how many parents do you know that don't talk about their offspring?

Couple B: She is fine, he is fine, but when she gets pregnant always has a miscarriage in the 3rd or 4th month of pregnancy. They also try several cycles of IVF, and one of the embryos go further the 4th month, but the doctor tells them that it isn't growing as it should and it seems to have some heart problems, he advices them to get an abortion because the fetus is not healthy, they refuse. Of course, they baby was born early, small and not only with heart problems.

Couple C: She is fine, but his sperm have no mobility. They try one IVF cycle, she gets pregnant and gives birth a healthy child. They want another child but they will adopt because the IVF was harder than she thought and she doesn't want to do it again.

I really think that with couple A and B, very wise Mother Nature was saying: "hey, your genetic material is not compatible, stop it and don't mix it".

[–]abqkatno tubes, no problems 15ポイント16ポイント  (0子コメント)

Mother Nature was saying: "hey, your genetic material is not compatible, stop it and don't mix it".

This is, in part, what I don't get about IVF. I think nature is a very wise thing. When I eat too much dairy, my body bloats and gets uncomfortable - gee, it's almost like I shouldn't do things that don't jive with my body. IVF is like that but on a bigger scale; at a certain point, it's just a form of self-absorption to overwrite nature in such an expensive, invasive, unnatural way.

[–]Dsxm41780CF dude in the USA[S] 13ポイント14ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yes, of the IVF babies I know there are: -urinary tract problems -heart problems -digestive problems -severe allergies -autism -developmental delays -xxx syndrome

[–]Amblonyx 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

Agreed.

I know a family(a family I adore!) that includes two kids, twins, conceived via IVF. The mother used a sperm donor. These kids were born three months early. One has Asperger's(and food sensitivities, and horrible eyesight even $1000 glasses don't fully correct), and the other had to have surgery for an eye problem. Both are still small for their age. I can't say if the process of conception played a part. But as much as I love the kids and their mom, I feel conflicted about the procedure.

[–]teenageidle 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah, there's something spooky about it.

[–]TinaTissue22/F/Aussie wanting Ragdoll 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

You do have a point really. One of my dearest friends and her sister are IVF babies. My friend has a high frequency hearing disorder that has to wear her hearing aids as a child. Her sister has this rare nerve issue along her jaw which has caused chronic pain and severe hearing loss which hearing aids cannot fix. This is in Australia so I'm not sure if this was subsidised by the government at the time

[–]anlondubhbeag 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

All these stories are simply pure anecdote though.

There was in fact a large meta-study in the January edition of JAMA Pediatrics this year demonstrating that children conceived through IVF have no additional developmental problems or other issues at a statistically significant level compared to the background population.

Some of the responses have verged toward reifying the "will of nature" as an actual force. Many require IVF to have children for non-genetic reasons. Also this reasoning could be applied to any medical procedure: "something is wrong with you, sorry it is the will of nature".

[–]SqueaksBCOD 29ポイント30ポイント  (21子コメント)

I have no issue with people spending money out of pocket on IVF because I don't really care what others do with their money. I do not however agree with it being covered by insurance. Frankly I see it the same as cosmetic surgery... it is elective, there for you should pay for it yourself. Heck you could likely convince me that cosmetic surgery should be covered (at least in some case) much sooner than that IVF should. Really they should be treated the same, as an elective procedure you pay for out of pocket.

[–]L_D_Machiavelli[🍰] -5ポイント-4ポイント  (18子コメント)

Then abortions and sterilizations shouldn't be covered by insurance either. One could argue that those are also elective procedures. I don't feel that one can complain about the insurance companies not paying for sterilization, and then say that ivf treatments shouldn't be payed for by insurance. Either both are payed for or neither.

[–]hephepheptothejive 15ポイント16ポイント  (12子コメント)

Abortions and sterilizations prevent a huge number of health problems caused by pregnancy and birth. If you think they shouldn't be covered, you shouldn't support other preventative healthcare, like vaccines or screening, either.

[–]L_D_Machiavelli[🍰] -1ポイント0ポイント  (11子コメント)

I didn't say I didn't support them being covered. I said that you can't argue for one thing that you want to be covered and not something that someone else wants. I'm off the opinion that both should be covered to a certain extent.

[–]hephepheptothejive 7ポイント8ポイント  (10子コメント)

But they're not equivalent. Abortion and sterilization are healthcare because they improve people's health by preventing pregnancy complications. IVF damages people's health and therefore is not healthcare. I don't think it's unreasonable to say that health insurance should cover healthcare.

[–]L_D_Machiavelli[🍰] -2ポイント-1ポイント  (9子コメント)

Sterilization improves a person's life? That's an opinion. Using a condom or birth control has the same effect. And I know this is going to sound bad but for some people children do improve their quality of life. Healthcare should cover medical treatments you do to your body. How does ivf damage a person? In that case we should outlaw driving, smoking, drinking... those can all have negative side effects and may require extensive surgery or medical treatments to correct.

You can't play god and cherry pick what you want healthcare for everyone to cover just based on your personal lifestyle.

[–]hephepheptothejive 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Not life. Health. Pregnancy damages health, that's pretty clear cut. Sterilization prevents pregnancy. IVF causes it.

We should not necessarily ban smoking or drinking, but nor should we consider them healthcare. Health insurance covers the effects of smoking, but you can't use it to buy cigarettes.

[–]SqueaksBCOD 3ポイント4ポイント  (7子コメント)

Using a condom or birth control has the same effect.

No it does not!

Condoms suck... anyone who says otherwise is likely lying to themselves out of desperation... a loving committed long term relationship should have other options.

Really I think that sterlization and abortions should fall under treatment for chronic conditions like cystic fibrosis, or diabetes. I.e an on going expense that has to be bad due to an unfortunate medical reality. Fertility should be covered as a preexisting condition that needs ongoing treatment.

[–]L_D_Machiavelli[🍰] 0ポイント1ポイント  (6子コメント)

Hell I wouldn't know.

Fine, you can let it; I just don't think that you can then say, when reaping the rewards of having sterilization payed for, that other people can't use a different treatment to get what they want. They probably won't be charging a sterilization treatment so let them charge their IVF. Everyone has the right to do to their body what they want. Do you have to agree, no.

[–]SqueaksBCOD 0ポイント1ポイント  (5子コメント)

Well, women always end up sterile... so sterilization is just doing something sooner.... it is not a choice, women all end infertile.

Honestly 90% of why i would support sterilization is for financial logical reason. I agree it is elective. But it is an elective procedure that saves money, hurts no one and helps everyone out. It is a good thing in so many ways. I can see wanting to be "fair" about it, but really not covering sterilization is pretty much cutting off your nose to spite your face. Long term sterilization is cheaper than BC... so why would I not support something that can save money and lower premiums for everyone? Why would anyone be against lower costs?

[–]L_D_Machiavelli[🍰] -1ポイント0ポイント  (4子コメント)

If its going to happen anyway, why pay for it? (don't answer that).

It helps everyone, again a strange blanket statement that doesn't seem to be rooted in logic... but opinion. Because those lower costs don't help the company. The company is there to make money, not pay for your treatments. And not to mention, if everyone got sterilized, that wouldn't be a good thing for humanity's future so I am very much against that. Do I want to have kids, no idea, I consider myself not ready to make that decision. But do I want humanity to thrive and expand, yes. We have a solar system, lets use it.

[–]SqueaksBCOD 2ポイント3ポイント  (3子コメント)

I think the argument can be made, but anyone with half a brain can figure out that it is in the insurance companies financial interest to pay for them. An abortion is hell of a lot cheaper than a pregnancy. Also I think preventative would be a better word then elective in this case.

Still i think giving up sterilization would be worth not funding fucking IVF

[–]L_D_Machiavelli[🍰] 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

Personally I'm conflicted on the issue of IVF, however, as long as it isn't illegal, it should be covered by insurance companies if they also cover sterilization. Furthermore, adopting, which has been presented quite a bit as an alternative to IVF, needs to be made less expensive (from what I've heard, it can be ridiculously expensive).

Otherwise you run into the issue of yes, adopting is cheaper, however, it isn't payed for by the insurance company at which point IVF is cheaper (for the individual, not overall).

[–]SqueaksBCOD 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

But IVF costs money long term and sterilization saves money long term... so they really are not the same thing. A person who seeks sterilization will save the insurance company money long term, thus is saving everyone's money... IVF just costs money and does no good.

[–]L_D_Machiavelli[🍰] 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

No they aren't. If people don't have kids, there are going to be fewer people who will be paying for insurance in the future. Its in the company's interest to ensure future customers because they don't make money off not having people purchasing their goods.

How exactly do they save the company money? IVF ensures future customers whereas sterilization ensures that the company will not have any future customers from that person(s)...

[–]jynnsomethingI have scale babies. 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

Abortions are on the same line as pregnancies (ones that occur without fertility treatments), and sterilization is a method of birth control. Pregnancies are elective, as is all birth control, but I don't think anyone is saying that those two things shouldn't be covered.

[–]runaway_child -4ポイント-3ポイント  (1子コメント)

I think the solution to this problem is simple. People who don't have a child and people who only have adopted children should definitely not pay for insurance premiums. Once childless people have a child, they can start paying those premiums. Of course I assume a considerable percentage of the work force consists of people who don't have children and that would make people who want IVF treatment wait much longer for the treatment, etc. And that would be good for the society as well. Some of those couples would probably adopt children instead. As for cosmetic procedures, maybe I can convince you that some of them should be covered :) I had to pay a fortune for varicose treatment for example. Sure, it was just cosmetic, but it was unsightly and it was making me unhappy. When I heard that it wasn't covered by insurance, I honestly wished people who made this decision would have big, throbbing, green veins all over their bodies, 10 times larger than mine. It's just cosmetic, isn't it? How do you feel now?

[–]SqueaksBCOD 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

As for cosmetic procedures, maybe I can convince you that some of them should be covered :) I had to pay a fortune for varicose treatment for example. Sure, it was just cosmetic, but it was unsightly and it was making me unhappy.

Yep, you are right... i certainly think this is more logical to cover than fucking IVF.

[–]annintofu 9ポイント10ポイント  (3子コメント)

I have a friend who is very dear to me, but she is ADAMANT about having a child one way or another because she doesn't want to grow old alone. Yep, she said that. (She's open to the idea of adoption but only as a last resort because you can't really love a child if it's not "yours")

Bear in mind that she is unattached, lives alone, on a single income (not a princely sum but not a pittance either), early thirties, loves travel and outdoor activities/sports.

She consulted her doctor about having a kid (not sure if it was IVF or turkey-basting) and the doc basically told her it's now or never due to some government legislation and, of course, the obvious, documented increase in serious health risks to the adult and child.

When I said I agreed with the doctor and that you can't refute the statistics, her response was pretty much "Nobody can tell me what I can and can't do."

I don't understand how any of this can possibly make sense to her, but it does, and it's dumb.

[–]onionsulphur33/F/clipped tubes 10ポイント11ポイント  (2子コメント)

you can't really love a child if it's not "yours"

I just cringed for all the adopted people out there... and I'm sure most of them are truly loved by their adoptive parents.

[–]abqkatno tubes, no problems 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm adopted, as are all 6 of my siblings. We're so loved by our parents, who were always called to adopt.

BUT! And how to put this delicately.... I do think there is something, well, biological about one's "own" child that, while I can't understand it, must be true. Pheromones and evolution and hormones and stuff all exists in a species to make sure we don't kill our offspring. As much as I hate it, I can kind of see the POV of wanting one's "own" kids, sadly :(

That said, the woman in the OP that would 'resort' to adoption seems self-absorbed and off-base - a human shouldn't be something you settle for

[–]Dsxm41780CF dude in the USA[S] 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm a CF school teacher and godparent. I've loved plenty of children that aren't mine!

[–]archpopeM/40s/USA/15+yrs ✂ 13ポイント14ポイント  (1子コメント)

This article just showed up in my FB feed and it's quite relevant. The author of "We Need to Talk About Kevin" explains how parenthood is not a right and the (UK) National Health Service should not fund any fertility treatments. My favorite quote: "[The NHS] have to shrink their core purpose down to the curing of disease and not the curing of dissatisfaction..."

[–]MazeMouse30/m/2 furry purry babies 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

That could backfire immensely on the people trying to get sterilized. Because that's (on the definition) not a curing of a disease.

[–]HareTrinity 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think the slowness of the adoption process is more of a problem.

I get that they want to stop kids going to abusive homes, but most abusive types can make their own children anyway, so I can't imagine that lengthy adoption processes really help much.

[–]meekkeetttI have cats to put through college! 12ポイント13ポイント  (1子コメント)

IVF twin here: I agree. My mother had a couple of eggs removed, and tried for the best. In all that were taken and fertilized, put back in, and survived, me and my sister ate three eggs and made it out lol. I've always asked her what would have happened if she didn't get pregnant (at the time, she had only one working ovary, the other removed due to cysts and was reaching towards her early 30's, so IVF was her only shot- she paid thru the nose) and she'd always tell me that she'd adopt. I'm not offended when people say IVF is wasteful- because it is, but back then you didn't go thru SEVERAL rounds of IVF!! Today, since multiple offspring is ENCOURAGED, docs actually egg women on to "try again", or freeze them. It's incredibly wasteful and unethical, when they could adopt!

[–]trillium_waste30F | DINK | fencesitter 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yes I agree.. I recently read about someone who's wife is on her NINTH cycle of IVF.

[–]trillium_waste30F | DINK | fencesitter 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm infertile and a fencesitter. We've never considered intrauterine insemination (IUI) or IVF because of the cost, the toll it would take on my body, and we don't agree with IVF on ethical/moral grounds.

Having gone through noninvasive fertility treatment (oral medication), that solidified our decision. I felt like garbage even after I stopped taking the medicine. My hormones were so screwed up. But I can see why people would pursue IUI/IVF as an option to have a biological child. We just never would do that. If we wanted to drop $15-40K on having a kid, we would adopt a child that already exists rather than throw our money away on treatment.

Some people's bodies are not meant to handle children and they should accept that.

I do think there's some truth to this. After two years of unprotected sex, I've never been pregnant so it leads us to believe that there must be something wrong with the genetic contents of our sex cells, or that something in my body is preventing it.

I can accept it, and it's difficult for me, but many many women (and men) cannot for whatever reason. Some people's marriages disintegrate while going through treatment. There are even infertility therapists. When this process started effing with my emotional/mental well-being and the happiness of my marriage, we decided we were done. We're looking to get sterilized at some point soon. But this viewpoint is not widely accepted in the infertility community, and that's why I post a lot in r/childfree, because we can see that life will go on without kids and we can be happy (and even happier!) regardless.

[–]Sparks434 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Personally I don't judge them for wanting IVF, and I don't think it's narcissistic. Some people want the experience of being pregnant and adoption isn't a walk in the park like some people make it out to be, and in some cases it can be more difficult.

[–]SocialIQof0 5ポイント6ポイント  (4子コメント)

I don't judge people for having different desires than I do. Just like I don't want people telling me to have kids, I'm not going to say IVF should be illegal or is selfish or immoral. I'm not a hypocrite.

What does bother me is when people who get IVF make hypocritical statements like, people shouldn't have abortions because it was "god's will." So was your being infertile. Ya know? Or there use to be this commercial here in the Seattle area for fertility treatments and it went, "You're worried about your job, but all of you wants a baby. You're worried about the economy, but all of you wants a baby." Then you shouldn't be spending tens of thousands on IVF OR having a baby at all for that matter. That commercial annoyed the shit out of me. It was so irresponsible.

[–]Dsxm41780CF dude in the USA[S] -3ポイント-2ポイント  (3子コメント)

That's the thing. It's about being responsible as a society. We are neglecting unwanted children that are already here in favor of children that nature/God is saying you shouldn't have.

[–]SocialIQof0 3ポイント4ポイント  (2子コメント)

Some people would say it is your responsibility to have children for the sake of humanity. Do you want them to. Choose for you?

[–]Dsxm41780CF dude in the USA[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

I can't speak for the rest of the world but in the USA, 1 in 4 children live in poverty and unemployment/underemployment is rampant, so not sure having more children is solving anything. How about taking care of the ones that are here before worrying about making new ones?

[–]SocialIQof0 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

You're missing the point. Probably on purpose.

[–]YoucanttakemeimfreeNo kids and three money 19ポイント20ポイント  (6子コメント)

It pisses me off that in the UK where I'm from you can get up to 3 cycles of IVF for free from the NHS up until you are 40 if you can't conceive naturally after 2 years but I can't get sterilised at 30 without a long hard battle. They are allowed to waste my tax money to make more babies which cost more tax money but not sterilise me which will ultimately save tax money because I will never claim child benefit or send a kid through our school system which is paid for by tax money.

[–]fross 4ポイント5ポイント  (4子コメント)

To play devils advocate, one can easily argue not having kids = less tax income in the future as we will have a smaller population. Given our economic model pretty much relies on an ever increasing population that would be a bad thing.

I do agree with you but just putting that broader picture out there.

[–]iwillfuckingbiteyou 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

True, but given the cost of each cycle of IVF to the NHS, any child born from it is going to have to pay a LOT of tax before they'll have covered the cost of their creation.

[–]HuiTerios22F: cats and video games > kids 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

The economic growth model we have never made much practical sense to me. I get the theory behind it, but the "objective" truth that "growth = good" always sounded ridiculous. It's worse when applied to children and the population. Japan thinks their problems will be solved with more babies when the land can barely contain the population. The US economy is "growing", but an entire generation struggles to find work, healthcare is a joke, and education is lackluster.

Although, I always thought that being adaptive and sustainable is more important than "growth", so I admit my opinion is pretty biased.

[–]hephepheptothejive 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

What a shame there are no working-age people willing to come to the UK and pay taxes here... /s

[–]YoucanttakemeimfreeNo kids and three money 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Depends if those kids grow up to actually pay tax or just live off welfare. I also didn't take into account immigration or emigration or any other factors. I was just giving a simplified scenario to illustrate my point about getting IVF vrs sterilisation on the NHS

[–]trillium_waste30F | DINK | fencesitter 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I can't get sterilised at 30 without a long hard battle.

That is ridiculous.

[–]onionsulphur33/F/clipped tubes 7ポイント8ポイント  (1子コメント)

Adoption is not the walk in the park that people make it out to be. It's expensive and has its own set of special problems/challenges.

I read an article by someone who was struggling with infertility, and I do feel sorry for them. Infertility treatments are nasty, so I guess babies must be really important to them if they're willing to go through that. No, I don't get it either, but then I love cats and some people hate them...

You know what really gets me about IVF? It's pretty much a given that the hormone treatments will fuck with the woman's mental health. Now, I respect someone's choice to have IVF, because I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't. (The question of funding is more complicated and I'm not getting into it.)

The author of the article I read had a little whine about people posting memes on fb about how great it is to be childfree, when he'd have given his right arm for a baby. Well, fucker, I'd give my right arm and 10 years of my life to be mentally healthy. And there your wife is deliberately ruining her healthy mind. But I respect her choice.

[–]trillium_waste30F | DINK | fencesitter 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Adoption is not the walk in the park that people make it out to be. It's expensive and has its own set of special problems/challenges.

Yes. A huge reason we don't want to pursue this path.

It's pretty much a given that the hormone treatments will fuck with the woman's mental health.

Yes. Even the noninvasive oral meds I was on for two cycles messed with me.. it was bad.

[–]hopeprojection 7ポイント8ポイント  (1子コメント)

IVF is such a waste of money. If your body is telling you that you can't conceive a child, it's probably for a good reason. The worst I've seen are the GoFundMe's asking for rounds of IVF. So you're going to waste money trying to get a child then you won't have any money left to raise it? Sounds like a solid plan. I did recently see a GoFundMe for a friend's family to raise funds for adopting a kid, so I suppose that's a little better.

I've met people (mainly asian) that adamantly say it's important they have their own child that share their flesh and blood instead of "mongrel" adoptive kids. It's disgusting and breaks my heart because there's so many unwanted children out there that just want a family.

[–]mangababe 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

It pisses me of that people are OK with if go fund me but not abortion ones.

Personally I don't see the difference but the latter gets crucified

[–]alarasticist 5ポイント6ポイント  (6子コメント)

I mean... I don't like it and wouldn't have it, but why not just mind your own business? It's not your body. It's not your money. It's not your family.

[–]trillium_waste30F | DINK | fencesitter 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

The point of discussing this here is just that... to have a discussion about it.

[–]alarasticist 6ポイント7ポイント  (2子コメント)

Some people's bodies are not meant to handle children and they should accept that. If they want children so bad, they should adopt or become foster parents. I don't like my insurance premiums going up because every infertile Myrtle wants to have their precious genetic spawn.

There's discussion, and then there's being an awful human being under the pretense of discussion. If I were one of the "friends" that this person "supported" and I found out that's what was being said about me behind my back, I'd never want to speak to them again. It's the wording as much as the sentiment. It's mean and it's small and I don't get it at all.

I sure as fuck wouldn't appreciate someone saying, say, "I dislike contraception and abortion. Some people's bodies are meant to gestate children and they should accept that. If they don't want children so bad, they should stop having sex. I don't like my insurance premiums going up because every slutty Sally wants her precious time and money."

I honestly don't see the difference. My body, my choice. Someone else's body, someone else's choice. How on earth can I demand respect for my autonomy if I won't grant it to others?

[–]Dsxm41780CF dude in the USA[S] -5ポイント-4ポイント  (1子コメント)

The difference is abortions and contraceptions save money over the long run. Children that were not meant to be brought into the world are costing money at the outset and cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to educate, protect, and serve.

My friends and I can also respect each other's differences even though we have different moral and political views.

I'm not against IVF if it's 100% self-funded, but when health care costs go up year after year, and there are $30,000 procedures out there being covered, there needs to be a more critical eye on things.

[–]alarasticist 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

The difference is abortions and contraceptions save money over the long run. Children that were not meant to be brought into the world are costing money at the outset and cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to educate, protect, and serve.

This is a pretty simplistic/incorrect understanding of how children affect the economy and society though. Children have a high initial cost, but even in childhood they drive massive amounts of consumption, which is good for the economy (it is really bad for the environment, but you didn't make that argument). Later in life they generate tax revenue. It's actually a net gain for the community over the kid's lifespan. This is one of the reasons why many governments and societies encourage childbearing– it's a long-term investment. I don't want kids so I don't have them, but I understand that's a privilege I have the right to take advantage of and not some favor I'm doing anyone other than myself.

Also, what is this?

Children that were not meant to be brought into the world

How arrogant are you to decide who is meant to be? If you're just allowing infertility to let mother nature dictate this for us, tell me, do you think mother nature should also dictate who gets cancer and dies? Why have medicine at all? Wouldn't it be cheaper to do away with expensive treatments altogether, and have survival of the fittest be our social motto? Either your beliefs are inconsistent, or you're kind of a crazy person.

[–]Dsxm41780CF dude in the USA[S] -4ポイント-3ポイント  (1子コメント)

It is my money when insurance companies cover part of it, I'm paying tax dollars for their kids to go to school, be protected by the police & fire department etc, especially when I'm already paying for social programs for kids that are unwanted by their birth parents.

[–]alarasticist 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

Sigh. This is the cost of living in a society– a society you BENEFIT from. Even if you went to go live off-the-grid in some unincorporated scrubland, collecting berries to eat and never, ever relying on goods and services society has raised other people to be in a position to provide you, you would have already benefitted from being raised in a country that used tax dollars to provide you with the tools you needed to survive reasonably comfortably up until this point. Other taxpayers subsidize the cost of services you need, too. It is delusional to think of yourself as some island unto yourself, unsupporting and unsupported by others. And I really hate to sound like some kind of pro-natalist but the truth is, most of those kids will undeniably grow up to pay taxes into the system that will help to pay for your roads, your Social Security, your fire and medical services. I'm not sympathetic to this libertarian "got mine, FU" attitude, and I wonder if you apply it selectively to child-related issues, or whether you have this selfish and shortsighted attitude to taxation across the board.

I have a similar point to make about your insurance premiums. First, it's not your money; it's the insurance provider's money. You pay a infinitesimal fraction of the whole and cannot reasonably claim ownership over other people's medical care. Other policy-holders subsidize the cost of your treatments too. Does everyone holding a policy have to agree with every medical treatment you undergo? If they think your medical needs aren't valid, is it their right to ask that they be denied to you? Do other people's moral stances on reproductive rights apply to you, or do you just want yours to apply to them?

Finally, you may claim to respect your friends but you do not use the language of respect when you talk about their choices. Look at the words and phrases you use to describe them. Would you want them to read your post here? If they did, how would they then feel about you? Can you honestly say that they would feel respected by you?

[–]KellyAnn3106 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

I like the way my insurance handles it. If there is a medical reason why you can't get pregnant, they will cover treatment for that reason. However, nothing to induce pregnancy is covered. So no fertility drugs, IVF, etc.

I'm not a fan of IVF in general. The religious nutjobs who think contraception is a sin and that getting pregnant is God's will whether you want it or not are the first ones to line up for artificial fertility treatments when they can't get pregnant. Maybe they should accept that it was God's will for them to not be able to reproduce. /s

[–]dachshundsarebetter 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

The one that irritates me is that they're starting to do uterine transplants. First because as someone with endometriosis, we still don't know what causes this disease or how to cure it (beyond invasive surgery which doesn't actually cure it, it can still come back), but by god we can transplant a uterus. Because getting a woman pregnant is clearly more important than ending her pain.

But, more importantly, what does a uterine transplant give you that other routes to parenthood do not? Even if you were the type of person who HAD to be biologically related to a child (which I take issue with, but for the sake of argument, I'll ignore it), there is surrogacy, that doesn't involve the same complications and risks (finding a donor, having the surgery, immunosuppressant drugs, the whole process of getting pregnant, having a high risk pregnancy). So what does this give you? The experience of being pregnant. If yo want to be a parent, be a parent, but don't put a nine month experience over the 18 years of work that follow, which will be very similar regardless of what path you take.

Lest anyone think I'm a huge asshole, I've had all of my reproductive organs removed. So I've had people suggest this procedure (because of course they assume I want kids. Ugh, no.). This isn't purely hypothetical for me.

[–]slowlaurisloves kids. Will not parent or step-parent. 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

To add on to this, there is no guarantee and very little research that a transplanted uterus can produce a healthy full term person at all.

if the uterus could reduce pain, or improve the quality of life for the woman, that's one thing, but to have several surgeries and drugs and spend several 100k to have a baby, and then have surgery to removed the uterus anyway.

Crazy and wasteful and gross and not medically necessary.

[–]unscrewthestarsf/31/cats don't need college funds 7ポイント8ポイント  (1子コメント)

I feel like, just as I have no right to tell a woman that she can't have an abortion, I don't have a right to tell a woman that she can't spend oodles of money on trying to have a baby.

I'm the daughter of parents who spent ages and ages trying to give me a sibling, to no avail. I'm the best friend of a woman who wants desperately to have children. I've seen the heartache that infertility causes. I will never forget being five years old and seeing my parents come home from the hospital late one night without the little sister I'd been expecting, the child instead dying within minutes of being born. My mother looked like she had just lost everything.

So no, I don't feel like it's a waste. I feel like if that's what you want out of life, that's what you want out of life. But I will say that if insurance covers that, they should also cover abortions. It goes both ways.

[–]JoshSimiliNo babies, no pets 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

I totally agree. I think IVF should be funded by insurance/taxpayers but so too should any other expression of reproductive freedom: abortion, sterilization, etc.

[–]bratless 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

I am actually against IVF in general and I don't think it should ever, ever be covered by any insurance. If people want to pay for it, then they can have their little science experiment but it should not be covered ever until cosmetic surgery is, since they are both vanity procedures.....

[–]teenageidle 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's always bothered me that people care so much about replicating their own genes that they'll happily ignore all of the hundreds of thousands of children desperately in need of families.

[–]Arudinne29M | Computers > Children 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

My siblings were conceived via IVF (Donor eggs). One is 10 the other two are 8. AFAIK they have no glaring medical issues.

I don't know if insurance was used to cover any part of it, as I was barely speaking to my dad when the went in for IVF.

[–]DeoDot 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

You really aren't alone in this line of thinking. I decided a long time ago that if I changed my mind about children, I would adopt. It was my first choice, not my fall back plan. Medical issues & life have made me very reluctant to adopt in the future though. That said, it has always disturbed me that people blatantly tell the world how they adopted because they couldn't conceive. I mean, give some consideration to your adopted child. They're hearing how your super pricey IVF failed & then the decision to adopt was made. It would certainly make me feel like a 2nd class citizen growing up in such a home.

[–]thr0wfarawayDon't be a doormat. Not your circus. Not your monkeys. 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yup.

Private pay.

Counseling however should be extensive and mandatory, and focus on "having a full uterus is not a goal in life, focus on either making your life great without kids or finding other ways to have kids in your life."

[–]uselesspaperclips 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

My mom had a friend when I was younger who went through this. Even at seven years of age I knew that you might as well just adopt. Now that my stepsister is spending thousands of dollars on this crap (choosing this over buying her first house and continuing to live with her mother) I realize I wasn't wrong.

[–]Erzherzog00719/M/Bi/PA/Allergic to Children 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

If an infertile person really wants kids, then why don't they just adopt?

If I wanted them, I think I would adopt, it's less selfish and we have plenty of humans. Also, no kid is perfect, yeah, that's right the kid you birthed or sired is not perfect.

[–]nordbundet_umenneske 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Call me a cunt, but if you can't conceive Mother Nature is telling you something. I don't believe in IVF. There are so many children who would love to be adopted. Most parents are selfish and want a little extension of themselves accessory

[–]Katie-Fay -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well gee, the body is sending a clear message by refusing to maintain the pregnancy. Doesn't take any degree of brilliance ...

[–]Marie1420 -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah, the insurance pisses me off! I think of it as an elective procedure. Nothing to do with maintaining one's health. So, why not cover nose jobs, liposuction, cosmetic teeth veneers, boob jobs? Really, these people are so warped in their thinking.

[–]MongooseCrusader -5ポイント-4ポイント  (1子コメント)

I think IVF should be illegal.

[–]Garlicplanet 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

NO, not a good idea... next thing illegal becomes abortion then. (I am joking but you get the point, I am in favor of abortion, but to be consistent I am in favor of IVF too).