6, honestly there are plenty of children out there for adoption and our population is ever increasing. She does have the right to her own opinion but the phrasing she used is very cold and devoid of emotion for the lives of children she could of had.
2007-02-18 07:24:22
·
answer #1
·
answered by tylw85 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Not all couples get the choice of having passionate love making and conceiving a child and it all turns out perfect. The people I find most vocally against IVF never had to consider it themselves so they figure they can make judgments on a process they know nothing about. (How selfish and naive of them.) But don't devalue the love a child receives who isn't conceived the 'traditional' way gets all throughout their life. And the other thing, how do explain it to a person conceived through rape? That obviously wasn't a loving moment between two people. Science only is the istigator in the process, science can't raise and love the child. Only the parents can do that. As for studies, I talk to real people who have been through the process, see the love for their kids and I know they have the same chances as everyone else in having a normal happy life and learning about how they came into their family and background. And in referrance to donors of egg's and sperm. There are registers for the future. There are some different dynamics than traditional adoption. I don't have time to go into here, thats a whole other novels worth of writing.
2016-05-24 03:07:14
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
While I don't think that the "sale" of eggs to rich people is morally wrong, I do think that the donation could be better used to serve the population already in existance. I am speaking of the $ the people would have paid for medical expenses, as well as the donated eggs themselves.
I do not find this a statement disturbing at all.
I give it a 3.
2007-02-18 07:23:40
·
answer #3
·
answered by Nikki 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I would say 1 she is now 31 years old and probably thought back on the situation. It has to be hard for some to think back on a decision like this, to think that they do in almost all forms have a child out there that is partly theirs and don't even know if it is the child next door from them. And we all would agree that we do need more advances in medical cures, even though not everyone agrees of the approach (like stem cell).
2007-02-18 07:25:27
·
answer #4
·
answered by destjaz 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I've read the article and I am an egg donor who has only donated to couples. The VAST majority of women pursuing donor eggs are NOT well-to-do American families. They are mostly average working families who struggle with everything they have to PAY for these cycles.
I give her statement a 7, but only because I'm glad she donated her eggs at all. I have considered donating to science as well, but feel I'd rather help a family.
2007-02-18 10:44:07
·
answer #5
·
answered by diaryofadonor 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
I'd give it a 1. I find nothing wrong with it and I'd actually give her kudos for being so secure thinking her eggs were being used for medical cures instead of becoming children.
2007-02-18 07:29:48
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
I didn't open the article, but that sounds very sensible to me. If you haven't noticed, the world has an overpopulation problem. We need to focus on our quality of life, not on creating additional resource sucking human beings.
And there are already so many children not being cared for right this minute. We should not be creating additional children until all of our children who are already here are cared for.
2007-02-18 07:26:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by Lisa A 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
I'm going with an 8. But she's allowed her opinion.
2007-02-18 07:18:18
·
answer #8
·
answered by ~*Isabel*~ 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
10 that is pretty sad
2007-02-18 07:18:38
·
answer #9
·
answered by Blondi 6
·
0⤊
1⤋