Stem Cell research and Fertility Clinics.

[Beth76]

I don't think the pro-life crowd views fertility clinics as a good thing. A woman got fired from her Catholic school for having twins via IVF. They see it as going against God because, as we all know, God doesn't want loving couples to have children, he prefers the 15 year old crackhead.

It doesn't make sense for the Catholic church to be opposed to IVF. Don't Catholics seek medical treatment? If someone gets cancer, does that mean God wants them to have cancer and they shouldn't treat it? Sounds again that people are picking and choosing what they care to believe in.

 

[AllyandJack]

yeartolate, I don't listen to The President much. I voted for him because I'd rather vote for Bozo the Clown than John Kerry and I do lean Republican in most instances, but he just never says anything that particularly interests me.

In my case, I go to a private office for most of my appointments and my RE is also a GYN. For my surgery, I go to a major hospital. So, unless they plan to protest cancer patients and dying children, they're not coming my way.

 

[HaleyB]

I also believe we will see major breakthroughs as a result of stem cell research and these people will throw away their picket signs and line up to have their family treated with those very same breakhroughs.

Never fails.

You are so right about that.

I can wait to see the flood of findings that come out as soon as some of the laws get changed.

 

[AllyandJack]

It doesn't make sense for the Catholic church to be opposed to IVF. Don't Catholics seek medical treatment? If someone gets cancer, does that mean God wants them to have cancer and they shouldn't treat it? Sounds again that people are picking and choosing what they care to believe in.

I agree, but I liken it more to paralysis. Cancer is life-threatening and having trouble conceiving, while horrible, isn't life-threatening. Many people live full lives in wheelchairs. Maybe God just wanted them to be in a wheelchair. Perhaps they shouldn't seek a treatment if it becomes available because it's messing with God's plan. God obviously didn't want them to walk. They can live a full life in their wheelchair, just like someone with trouble conceiving can live a full life without children.

I can understand their opposition to the destruction of embryos. However, that is a small part of the treatment and, like I said, not everyone has embryos to spare. I don't. Most people don't. The idea that each couple has 10+ embryos abandoned is a myth. People are lucky to get 10 eggs, lucky if 8 fertilize, lucky if 2 or 3 survive to be transferred, lucky if the rest survive to be frozen at all. But, I do understand that opposition because it does happen that embryos are destroyed.

That goes back to stem cell research - if they would allow the embryos to go to research, they would be doing some good for the world and wouldn't just be destroyed. Every life has a purpose - no matter how short and maybe someone's abandoned embryo could be the catalyst to a cure for some disease - like paralysis.

 

[Galahad]

Not sure this will be helpful, but the policy regarding stem cell research is not that it is or should be illegal (it isn't) but that the federal government will not pay for it. It has long been an established policy that the federal government will not pay for abortions. On that point at least there seems to be consistancy.

As you yeartolate's question about clinics, in our state there are numerious freestanding women's clinics that may "offer" prenatal care but really only do abortions. Some will also give adoption referals. Planned parenthood clinics for example primarily refer for abortions and dispense contraception, right? They may "offer" prenatal care but I'd be really surprised if they every really are asked to give it.

 

[smartestnumber5]

I get the religious opposition to abortion. I am not disputing that. What I cannot understand is if "life begins at conception" --- why aren't fertility clinics harrassed --- it is well known that scores of fertilized eggs are either destroyed or allowed to die.

I think the best explanation is that the majority of those who oppose abortion don't really believe that life beings at conception--or at least, they don't believe that the life that exists at conception (or in early pregnancy) is morally similar to the life of, say, a 5 year old. For example, think how many people who are generally against abortion find abortion in the case of rape acceptable and, in fact, are greatly disturbed by the idea that a woman be forced to give birth to the child of her rapist. But if a 5 week old embryo were morally equivalent to a 5 year old then surely the fact that the mother was raped could never justify killing the embryo. It seems clear that what really determines whether a particular abortion is seen as okay or not is the sexual virtue of the woman. How often do you hear "well she shouldn't have had sex if she didn't want to deal with the consequences"? (There's a book called How Conservatives Won the Abortion War which documents how in the 80s and 90s pro-choice organizations realized that the only way to get their candidates into office was to focus on "deserving" women who needed abortions--i.e. women who'd been raped...and their strategy actually worked.)

Since the "guilt" of having chosen to have sex seems to be a huge factor in the acceptibility of an abortion for many anti-abortion people, it makes sense that there'd be less concern about embryos being destroyed at fertility clinics. There needn't be any "you made your bed, now lie in it" feeling because the production of the embryos didn't involve sex at all. So while the average person who's against abortion might not like the destruction of embryos at fertility clinics, it doesn't bring with it all the sex issues involved in abortion.

At least, that's the best explanation I can think of.

 

[AllyandJack]

Not sure this will be helpful, but the policy regarding stem cell research is not that it is or should be illegal (it isn't) but that the federal government will not pay for it. It has long been an established policy that the federal government will not pay for abortions. On that point at least there seems to be consistancy.

Is it legal at the state level? My contract says that I can either destroy my embryos or donate them. I can donate them to another couple or to research, if it becomes legal in RI. That led me to believe it wasn't legal in the state since it wasn't an option yet, but my cryopreservation period is 3 years, so it looks ahead to the possibility of it being legal in 3 years.

 

[Galahad]

Is it legal at the state level? My contract says that I can either destroy my embryos or donate them. I can donate them to another couple or to research, if it becomes legal in RI. That led me to believe it wasn't legal in the state since it wasn't an option yet, but my cryopreservation period is 3 years, so it looks ahead to the possibility of it being legal in 3 years.

I don't think there is a federal law against it so it would be a state thing, yeah. Isn't California doing a lot of stem cell work funded by the State?

Also, I'm sure there are PP sites that do things other than abortion and contraception now that I think about it, but I would still bet it isn't the norm. Bottom line is that in many areas of the country abortions are primarily done in stand alone clinics that almost exclusively do abortions.

 

[StephSparrow]

I think a lot of people's opinions about stem cell research would change if they had a close family member who could be helped by stem cell research.

 

[Galahad]

I read a discussion recently about another health issue where it was stated that some bit of news about the treatment of a disease might deter folks from taking the best case action to prevent the disease - that even perhaps it was not responsible to even report that bit of news. This is almost a parallel to that. There may be promise to embryonic stem cell research, but the politics and media coverage of the issue have made the suggestion that we not ignore adult stem cell or cord blood stem cell work almost unspeakable for fear of appearing to be "one of them". Just like living in Florida, let's say, is not a paradise that is a panacea that will solve all of your ills, neither is embryonic stem cell work the silver bullet that will make bad things stop happening to people.

There are medical ethics folks that ARE NOT religious that have reservations about embryonic stem cell work just as there are those with non religious objections to "therapeutic" cloning. I think there really IS a lot of nuance to this, even if it is mispronounced.

 

[yeartolate]

I think a lot of people's opinions about stem cell research would change if they had a close family member who could be helped by stem cell research.

I don't know. Many are still under the misunderstanding that the stem cells are harvested from aborted fetuses. If they really and truly believe that, I don't think they will get past it. On the other hand, if they had a family member with a disease that could be cured by stem cell technology, they might be more willing to understand that the stem cells were essentially harvested from a petri dish that had been created from a sperm and egg that were placed there several days before.

 

[Mugg Mann]

I think a lot of people's opinions about stem cell research would change if they had a close family member who could be helped by stem cell research.

Nancy Reagan being the most visible and recent example of the validity of that statement.

 

[LindsayDunn228]

Every life has a purpose - no matter how short and maybe someone's abandoned embryo could be the catalyst to a cure for some disease - like paralysis.

*sigh*

Paralysis is not necessarily a disease.

 

[LindsayDunn228]

I think a lot of people's opinions about stem cell research would change if they had a close family member who could be helped by stem cell research.

Not necessarily. I am a paraplegic and I do not support embyonic stem cell research.

 

[robertsmom]

I also believe we will see major breakthroughs as a result of stem cell research and these people will throw away their picket signs and line up to have their family treated with those very same breakhroughs.

Never fails.

I agree. It's the same principle as people who are against the death penalty.....UNTIL someone they know becomes a victim of violent crime.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

For the record, my two children both started life as frozen embryos.

We also had left over embryos which we donated to another infertile couple which recently resulted in the birth of a healthy, beautiful baby. I can assure you it was not an easy choice nor one which we took lightly. But it was the best for us.

Here is what President Bush has to say about Stem Cell research:
President Bush's Position on Stem Cell Research

To answer the OP's question, one of your basic assumptions is at least partially incorrect.

Stem cell research uses donated leftover fertilized eggs from fertility clinics

Embryos must be donated by their genetic parents in order to be used for stem cell research; they're not just taken or given away by clinic staff. It's a legal process. Many people either don't know this is an option or choose not to go that route with their embryos. Many embryos languish in clinic's freezers because parents aren't sure what to do with them. Most people I talk with say they don't think they could give their embryos to anyone else. And they really don't want to destroy them, either. After all, these embryos are often siblings to their own children and they can see their potential despite knowing they are currently a clump of cells. So they linger.

There is currently an Embryo Adoption Awareness campaign underway to let parents know this could be an option for them. Being a parent of frozen embryos does not automatically make you aware of these complicated issues. I certainly wasn't. We all need to educate ourselves on the issues (the clinics don't offer it) in order to make informed choices. I believe that with understanding of the issues, many couples who elect to destroy their embryos will ultimately give them up for stem cell research in order that some good becomes of them, however they need to understand the issues in the first place first.

 

[6_Time_Momma]

It doesn't make sense for the Catholic church to be opposed to IVF. Don't Catholics seek medical treatment? If someone gets cancer, does that mean God wants them to have cancer and they shouldn't treat it? Sounds again that people are picking and choosing what they care to believe in.

Well, it does make sense when you understand the reasons, but I won't go into that here.

As to the OP, I can't answer the question about why they are not targeted, but speaking for myself, yes I feel that, as far as the destruction of embryos, the "abortion clinc" and the "fertility clinic" are accomplishing the same thing. But, since I don't protest outside of anywhere, that doesn't answer your original question, huh?

 

[AllyandJack]

*sigh*

Paralysis is not necessarily a disease.

Fine. Some CONDITION, like paralysis.

 

[LindsayDunn228]

Fine. Some CONDITION, like paralysis.

Sorry to be defensive, but it gets old when people think I am "diseased" when I am not.

 

[yeartolate]

For the record, my two children both started life as frozen embryos.

We also had left over embryos which we donated to another infertile couple which recently resulted in the birth of a healthy, beautiful baby. I can assure you it was not an easy choice nor one which we took lightly. But it was the best for us.

Here is what President Bush has to say about Stem Cell research:
President Bush's Position on Stem Cell Research

To answer the OP's question, one of your basic assumptions is at least partially incorrect.
Embryos must be donated by their genetic parents in order to be used for stem cell research; they're not just taken or given away by clinic staff. It's a legal process. Many people either don't know this is an option or choose not to go that route with their embryos. Many embryos languish in clinic's freezers because parents aren't sure what to do with them. Most people I talk with say they don't think they could give their embryos to anyone else.

First of all, I thought it was a given that written permission was needed to donate the embryos. I never in my wildest dreams thought that they could just be given away.

Second of all, most of the people I know who have undergone IVF have had to clearly sign papers about what their options were. Most (that I know) have made an active decision NOT to have others adopt their frozen embryos. It was more than disconcerting to them to have full sisters and brothers running around. I totally support a family's willingness to adopt out their embryos, but I can understand the conflict.

If a clinic is not educating the woman with leftover embryos on their disposition, I think they are falling short of thier duty.

Most women that I know that have gone through IVF have totally educated themselves prior to commitment . They seemed aware of the issues if they had a sucessful pregnancy on the first cycle.