IVF: Getting into the God Business

When the Octomom story broke a number of months ago, my head was spinning at the revelation that a fertility doctor had implanted an unemployed, single mother (who already had 6 children and who was sponging off her parents, living in their small 3 bedroom house) with 8 embryos. Somehow the doctor's behavior seemed even more insane to me than the behavior of Octomom herself which says a lot. The story got a ton of media - all the talking heads were flapping their gums (and wagging their fingers) over it, but we never did hear from the doctor himself, did we? No, he avoided the limelight, probably because he knew his behavior was nothing short of criminal. The man should have been thrown in jail.

I haven't written about the subject of in vitro fertilization (IVF) before today, but it's been on my blogging back burner. Thankfully, two of my readers e-mailed me to vent about the subject and their eloquent letters (which they permitted me to reprint below) raise some very interesting questions and I'd love to hear your thoughts:

Is in vitro fertilization in line with "God's plan"? (assuming one believes in God)

Is IVF an act of selflessness, or selfishness?

Is having children an entitlement? Is the capacity to give birth a medical necessity? Should health insurance companies be required to cover IVF?

Are those who pursue IVF (and the docs who perform this procedure) "playing God"?

By the way, thank you to ALL the readers who contact me with blog post ideas or forward links to me. I save them in a little file called "Blog Post Ideas" and my folder is getting pretty big. I plan to dip into it on a regular basis. Please continue to send me your ideas, letters, links and vents. You can reach me at firecracker_mandy(at)yahoo(dot)com.

And now to the letters of our esteemed readers, HawkMom and Shrodinger's Kittens (thanks, ladies).

Hi,

I'm a mother (obviously) but I just love reading your Childfree blog. I've been to other places that just rant about "greedy moos". I don't take it too personally, though, as I've heard from some childfree acquaintances that parents are often self-righteous and arrogant towards them. All of what you say is spot on. When having children, you gain a lot emotionally and spiritually (if you're into that), but you give up a lot more. If kids were adults, we wouldn't put up with them. It's all take, take, take. I adore my girl to pieces, though, so I don't mind being temporarily insane for the next 18 years, which is basically what parenting is. I'm okay with that. : )

Anyway, I was about to write a post on my own blog about IVF and fertility treatment. I've written about it before and commented on forums, but I was charbroiled beyond recognition. These ladies are brutal. I'm in a weird place, as I am unapologetically pro-choice. However, fertility treatments in general make me uneasy. I'm one of those natural birth loons, so forgive me in advance, but I do find it offensive that many of the same women pumping themselves full of hormones and graded embryos are rallying against gay marriage and abortion as "against God's plan". Hypocrisy much? I lost a friend over this recently, when she found an old blog entry of mine. As diplomatically as I could, I explained to her in an e-mail back-and-forth that her twins (formerly triplets) were more the result of her selfish desires, that her PCOS was not a life-threatening disease comparable to cancer, and I just couldn't sit back and pretend that she was selfless and brave, no matter how many treatments she went through. She had "no regrets" over the fact that one of her babies died before the end of the first trimester and another one almost died in utero, spending the first few weeks of his life on breathing machines, clinging to life. She said she would do it all again, because I "wouldn't understand" what it's like to want something so many other women can have. The jaw drops when I think about this. I did apologize for offending her, if that helps. I thought you may understand my perspective, because those of us who have biological children or don't want any altogether are forbidden to have an opinion. I was actually searching your archived posts for something about the topic. I have to go run some errands now, but I was wondering if you could link me up to an old entry or if you were interested in writing about it in a newer post. My interest in all of this has been piqued even more with that recent mix-up in Wisconsin.

HawkMom

______________________________________________________

Every time I see an article that argues assisted reproductive technologies should be covered by insurance I can't make a coherent argument. It makes me too angry. Covered by insurance? It should be illegal. Nobody ever died from not having a baby. And then you get a situation like Jon and Kate--note in the article when they started trying for another baby she told the doctor she would not selectively reduce. This is the thing I hate most about assisted reproduction: for some reason your body is not able to sustain an embryo or bear a child, but we can chemically torture it into doing what it shouldn't, all because society says you are a failure as a woman if you don't pursue every possible option to get a baby, no matter how impractical or expensive or detrimental to your health. Look what Science can do for you! Oh, so many beautiful babies! It's a miracle!

Then a few months later the doctor sits them down and says, "You have to think about selective reduction. There are too many embryos," And mommy and daddy say, "Oh, teehee, I can't play God!" Guess what, you got into the god business when you started this chain of events. Everyone screams about their right! to have a baby, but nobody wants to take the responsibility. So God, in the guise of the taxpayers, pays for their defective litter that's plagued with physical problems and learning disabilities. Because no sacrifice is too great for a baby, especially if other people do the sacrificing.

So where does it end? Thanks for letting me rant, I apologize if I got wordy, but I thought you might have something (more coherent and less ranty) to say about this article if you hadn't seen it already. Take care.

Shrodinger'sKittens

The Selfish Assumption

CFVixen sent me an interesting article on CNN.com entitled What's so Wrong with Being Selfish? The author of the article defends childfree folks against the accusations that we are selfish with this simple argument, "Yeah, we're selfish. So what?" She wants people to get over the fact that childfree folks are out having fun instead of suffering at home wiping runny noses and poopy asses. Live and let live.

I know the author means well and I generally like the article, however, I do have a bone to pick. She declares that childfree folks are selfish (a very tired stereotype), the underlying assumption being that parents are not. This is where I take issue with this article and if I have to keep arguing this point over and over like a broken record, I will. Parents are just as selfish as childfree folks. Can anyone see this besides me? Parents don't have children so they can toil, suffer and sacrifice. They choose to have kids for the joys they believe they will get out of it. Childfree folks choose to live a life sans children for the same desire to live a joyful life. We all want to be happy and joyful and we pursue the life that we believe will make us feel that way. Pursuing a happy life is not selfish, it's just the point of living. Why would someone want to pursue a life that didn't make them happy?

However, despite the fact that both childfree folks and parents live the way they do because they are in pursuit of a happy life, the two groups are judged very differently. Parents are ascribed positive traits - giving, caring and selfless, while the childfree are called selfish. And why? Because people who have kids have to trudge through a boatload of misery to obtain the joy and happiness they seek, whereas childfree folks sail effortlessly to their goals.

If pursuing a happy life is selfish, then parents are at least as selfish as childfree folks, if not more. What could be more selfish and narcissistic than bringing another child into an already overpopulated world when there are so many homeless orphans clamoring for loving homes? What could be more selfish than creating a little mini-me (instead of adopting) because you want a little replica of yourself? What could be more selfish than wanting someone who needs you, who depends on you, who looks up to you, who you can mold and shape into what you want so you can feel good about yourself? What could be more selfish than creating a human being so that you can add some meaning to your life? Or so you can live vicariously through her? What could be more selfish than bringing another consumer into a world whose resources are growing more scarce by the day?

Need I go on?

Childfree folks are always, automatically assumed to be selfish, even by people who should know better (like the childfree author of the article in question), while the parents are selfish angle almost never gets explored. Frankly, I am tired of it. So I am going to keep exploring it and exploring it even if I have to beat it like a dead horse. Yes, childfree folks live fun lives and everyone should get over it. But don't exclaim "yeah, I'm selfish - get over it" unless you also exclaim, "and you're selfish too". The truth is, we're happy living our fun childfree lives and we hope you're happy living your life of ass and nose wiping. To each his own.

And then, there's this final point: I may not be wiping noses and asses all day long, but that doesn't mean my life revolves only around myself or that it's all about me. I am a wife, a daughter, a sister, a niece, an aunt, a friend, a companion of house cats, and an employee. In each of these roles I am devoted, caring, committed and engaged and I give of myself every day. To label me selfish because I have declined to participate in one specific type of caring role - the parental role - is ludicrous. It is akin to calling someone a picky eater because they don't like Hamburger Helper, even though they eat everything else in the cupboard.

Grandchildren at all Costs

Sometimes I worry that eventually I will run out of things to write about in this blog. It has to happen someday, right? I mean how many issues and topics about pronatalism and childfreedom are there to write about? Eventually the well has to run dry.

But, just when I have this thought, another story always presents itself. And here is the next one: a woman, whose 21 year old son died in an assault, petitions the court to harvest his sperm so she can have grandchildren.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

While I sympathize with this woman for losing her son (who she obviously loved very much), I have to say that this is about the most selfish and unethical thing I have ever heard. When I saw this on the Today Show this morning, I was actually rendered speechless, so what does that tell you?

Your thoughts?

Courage and Childfree Honesty

Did you ever notice that most childfree people feel the need to be self-deprecating when explaining their status? For example, a person will explain that he is childfree because he isn't parent material - he can barely take care of his houseplants. Or - here's one you hear a lot - "I'm too selfish to have kids" (the next time I hear a childfree person say this, I swear I am going to smack her). Even our friend George Clooney, who I just featured in my Childfree Celebrity Spotlight, while vocally childfree, was careful to point out that he doesn't have the qualities that are required for being a good parent and described how much he admires people with those qualities. In other words, "parenthood is wonderful, but I'm not wonderful enough to be a parent". We all understand why childfree folks are self-deprecating. Withering under the harsh glare of critical outsiders, it makes us less uncomfortable, and makes our childfree status more palatable, if we laugh it away as a character defect.

For once, I would like to hear a childfree person stand up proudly and tell the truth instead of soft-pedaling and dishing out what they think people can stomach. For once, tell them how great childfreedom is, how we're not childfree because we lack some elusive qualities, but because we are blessed with an abundant ability to think for ourselves and choose wisely. And while you're at it, tell them how we really feel about parenthood. I am going to start. Would you like to join me? If so, please post your own statement in a comment.

This is my declaration of childfree honesty:

I am childfree because I think parenthood is the most over-rated and over-glorified brainwashing scam human beings have ever fallen prey to. While there are certainly intrinsic rewards to being a parent, a careful analysis reveals that the cost is far higher than the rewards. I am childfree because life is short and and there are simply many more things I would rather do than to take care of children.

I do not think having a child makes a person selfless and I am keenly aware of the selfishness that motivates people to have children. Both childfree and parents choose to live the life that they believe will make them the most happy, which probably makes both selfish. The difference is, the childfree lifestyle choice is kinder to our planet and childfree people have more time to dedicate themselves to selfless activities which better society as a whole.

I choose not to have children because I think the childfree life is preferable, not because I don't have what it takes to be a good parent. Over the years, many have told me I would make a great mom and evaluate me as "mom material". I am nurturing. I love children and they gravitate to me. I am sensitive to their needs and educated about child psychology and development. I treat children with respect and kindness and I bring out the best in them. I enjoy their company, but I don't need to have them around me 24/7 in order to feel I have a purpose in life. I have come to realize that I enjoy children precisely because I am not a parent.

I do not hold the opinion that everyone should be childfree, but I think our world would be heck of a lot better off if more people were. Although parents would like us to believe that they are making a huge contribution to humanity by having children, I do not share that opinion. Our planet is overpopulated, overheated and overpolluted to the point that we are teetering on the edge of extinction, not to mention that when I look around at most people, I think at least 60% of them have no business being parents. Witnessing the dysfunctional interactions with their children, it's likely their children will grow up to be detriments to society, rather than contributors to it. And let's face it, although every parent likes to dream that her child will be the one to grow up to cure cancer, the odds of that are 1 in a million - actually higher when one considers that there are almost 7 billion people living on the planet and we're still waiting for that cure. As George Carlin says in one of my favorite stand-up routines, "Kids are like any other group of people - a few winners, and a whole lot of losers."

I do not perceive reproduction and childbirth as a "miracle", nor do I see it as an accomplishment, although most parents enjoy thinking of it this way for obvious reasons. Reproduction is a biological function common to all living beings and frankly, it's so ordinary. Dogs do it. Rats do it. Mosquitoes do it. I am far more impressed with people whose accomplishments actually require some talent, intelligence, effort and thought.

My declaration may seem harsh, but at least it's honest. You will never hear me say, "I'm too selfish to have kids", "I wouldn't make a good mom", "I am lacking all those wonderful qualities that parents have" because if I did, it would be a load of horseshit. The truth is, I have plenty of wonderful qualities, am no more selfish than the next person, and would make a great mom if I chose to be one. I choose not to be one because I am happier just the way I am.

Thank you for indulging me. I will now step off my soap box.

Crazy on Parade

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Well, we knew it was only a matter of time before the octuplet mom began making her rounds in the media to defend her craziness. And crazy she is. When questioned how she will be able to financially support herself and 14 children, she says that she will be able to support them once she is finished school (she is pursuing a masters in counseling). Okay, so question number 1: how is she going to be able to attend classes, write papers, do all the reading, research and the rest of the grueling work that is required to obtain a graduate degree when she has 14 children to take care of?

And let's see here - a masters level therapist...how much money do you think she will earn per year once she gets a job? $50,000 maybe? Yes, I am sure that will be enough to support a family of 15, especially with the likelihood of developmental and learning disabilities in many of the children.

When questioned about how she will take care of all these children, she said she will be able to get by with the help of her family, friends and the church. Well, if I remember correctly, her dad spends much of his time working in the Middle East, and her mother, apparently so disgusted with the whole situation, reported early when this story broke that she told Nadya she would "not be there" when Nadya brought the babies home. So the parents are out as a source for help. So that leaves other family members, friends and the church. How nice to dump all this responsibility on others simply because she had a selfish desire to have way more babies than she can possibly care for.

And here's the best part of all. In the interview she confirms that the same doctor handled all of her IVF procedures! More on that to come...