Embryo Adoption

[delilahdog11]

[link=]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/10/evangelicals-embryo-adopt_n_1871832.html [/link]

The worse part is the quote at the end about Christians having a history of taking in/care of discarde people. Then why arent fundies adopting 14 year old kids stuck in the foster system? Or supporting more social programs for the improvished?

Another attempt to say life begins at conception.

[lilwriter85]

I hated that article. I do think embryo adoption is a good thing, but I agree a lot of fundie and evangelical types aren't adopting that much from the American foster care system. One Zsu's wacky fan girls is attempting to adopt from foster care. That wackjob set her blog to private.

[CrazySister]

I have no problem with anyone adopting an embryo, but if you're going to use it as a way of being holier than thou, then stfu! If you really want to help people - adopt an older kid from foster care!

[Buggaboo]

I completely understand what you all are saying and the argument is, in my opinion, correct in that it shows their hypocrisy right down to a T. So I agree with the foster care argument.

However, at the same time, the idea of them adopting an older child or teen out of foster care and forcing their lifestyle upon them, using copious amounts of guilt, brainwashing, isolation, and let's not forget The Mighty Rod to get their point across, is sickening and terrifying to me.

As far as I'm concerned, fundies shouldn't be allowed to adopt. They don't think gay couples should adopt? Puh-leeze. THEY are the ones I would be afraid of my child ending up with!

[Buggaboo]

[link=]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/10/evangelicals-embryo-adopt_n_1871832.html [/link]

The worse part is the quote at the end about Christians having a history of taking in/care of discarde people. Then why arent fundies adopting 14 year old kids stuck in the foster system? Or supporting more social programs for the improvished?

Another attempt to say life begins at conception.

I'm sure that quote should have said "Christians have a history of taking in/care of discarded people, under the condition that they won't mind having Christianity shoved down their throats."

That would be more accurate.

Even the non fundie groups that DO participate in social outreach rarely do so in a "no strings attached" manner. There's always a certain amount of proselytizing that needs to be endured in order to get help.

[Mela99]

More proof that fundies care more for the unborn than the ones who are already here. That and I'm sure they have trouble forcing their believes on already grown children with minds of their own. They're no good unless they can be molded.

Asses.

[Gil]

How do you make fun of people who think their reproductive choices make them "speshul snowflakes" when they actually refer to the products of their reproductive choices as "snowflakes" already?

[BlackHawk]

While I agree fundies are obnoxious, there is more to it than just "adopt an older child from foster care!" I hate this thought process... that if you want to adopt you should jump in and adopt an older child cause that is the only child who needs adoption. Yes, those teens are the least likely to be adopted in the end, but there is so much more that goes in to adopting an older foster child than "saving" them. While I commend people who can adopt older children, with their needs, but it's not for everyone and judging people who don't as harsh annoys me.

To the article... this type of shit just blows my mind. Fundies really think they are "saving" those bunches of cells? That's sad to me.

[Witsec7]

When Bush was pres. he had a program that had 'snowflake' in it's name, like speshul snowflakes. It was an adoption program for embryos, and he would have a big party at the WH every year for the post birth embryos and their adoptive families.

Here's a link.

http://www.nightlight.org/snowflakeadoption.htm

[Guest Anonymous]

When Bush was pres. he had a program that had 'snowflake' in it's name, like speshul snowflakes. It was an adoption program for embryos, and he would have a big party at the WH every year for the post birth embryos and their adoptive families.

Here's a link.

http://www.nightlight.org/snowflakeadoption.htm

I totally remember watching the TV coverage of this. I was desperately trying to remember the name. It seems so obvious now.

[Anxious Girl]

[link=]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/10/evangelicals-embryo-adopt_n_1871832.html [/link]

The worse part is the quote at the end about Christians having a history of taking in/care of discarde people. Then why arent fundies adopting 14 year old kids stuck in the foster system? Or supporting more social programs for the improvished?

Another attempt to say life begins at conception.

'Cause they want brainwash a fresh baby who hasn't experienced the world yet; and according to fundies, adopted kids may rebel more because they have been exposed to "the world" or they're put up for adoption because their parents sinned, and the fundies don't want a cursed baby in their home. That's my theory, anyway. :roll:

[Witsec7]

I totally remember watching the TV coverage of this. I was desperately trying to remember the name. It seems so obvious now.

I actually knew an evangelical Quaker who did this. He'd had a vasectomy during a prior marriage and many years later married a much younger woman and this is how he proceeded to acquire his second family. I think they are on their third snowflake, I've kinda lost touch with him.

[Anxious Girl]

I actually knew an evangelical Quaker who did this. He'd had a vasectomy during a prior marriage and many years later married a much younger woman and this is how he proceeded to acquire his second family. I think they are on their third snowflake, I've kinda lost touch with him.

:shock: Do ya think Bush orignated the term "special snowflake?" That could be hilarious. :lol:

[Buggaboo]

'Cause they want brainwash a fresh baby who hasn't experienced the world yet; and according to fundies, adopted kids may rebel more because they have been exposed to "the world" or they're put up for adoption because their parents sinned, and the fundies don't want a cursed baby in their home. That's my theory, anyway. :roll:

I think you are right, my anxious friend ;)

[CrazySister]

While I agree fundies are obnoxious, there is more to it than just "adopt an older child from foster care!" I hate this thought process... that if you want to adopt you should jump in and adopt an older child cause that is the only child who needs adoption. Yes, those teens are the least likely to be adopted in the end, but there is so much more that goes in to adopting an older foster child than "saving" them. While I commend people who can adopt older children, with their needs, but it's not for everyone and judging people who don't as harsh annoys me.

To the article... this type of shit just blows my mind. Fundies really think they are "saving" those bunches of cells? That's sad to me.

(Really NOT trying to sound defensive, but I'm not sure how better to word this) I only know where I'm coming from, but I'm in no way trying to say adoption in general but specifically adopting an older child is somehow easy. It's a very difficult decision and not one that should be taken lightly. My snark is aimed at those who think they're "saving those bunches of cells" while there are hundreds of thousands in foster care who need permanent homes. That said, I think it's AWESOME they're NOT adopting older kids who the fundies would beat down untill the kids complied. ...Just wanted to clarify that I don't believe adoption (of a child of any age) is some simple course of action or one that fundies should be taking at all.

[JMarie]

Several years ago, there was an article by the bioethicist at a local university. It stuck in my head because the concept of embryo adoption seemed so absurd. The author felt that embryo adoption was unnecessary because:

-- When embryos are created, the best-looking ones are implanted. The ones that are left over might be less viable. If you were going to use someone else's genetic material, wouldn't it be better to start with an egg or sperm from a healthy twenty-something, rather questionable seconds from an infertile couple?

-- A survey was taken at several fertility clinics, asking the patients what they would theoretically do with leftover embryos. Respondants were overwhelmingly unlikely to give unused embryos to someone else.

-- It doesn't cost anything to give away your embryos. Well, there's still the clinic fees, but the Stupid Snowflake people charge $8000 for their services, plus another $1000-3000 for a home study. http://www.nightlight.org/wp-content/up ... -facts.pdf (scroll down to "Program Fees")

It's the last point that really bothers me. It's like CollegeMinus. A Christian group puts their spin on something that's not complicated in the first place, and they charge a bunch of money from unsuspecting, vulnerable people.

[Bethella]

Several years ago, there was an article by the bioethicist at a local university. It stuck in my head because the concept of embryo adoption seemed so absurd. The author felt that embryo adoption was unnecessary because:

-- When embryos are created, the best-looking ones are implanted. The ones that are left over might be less viable. If you were going to use someone else's genetic material, wouldn't it be better to start with an egg or sperm from a healthy twenty-something, rather questionable seconds from an infertile couple?

-- A survey was taken at several fertility clinics, asking the patients what they would theoretically do with leftover embryos. Respondants were overwhelmingly unlikely to give unused embryos to someone else.

-- It doesn't cost anything to give away your embryos. Well, there's still the clinic fees, but the Stupid Snowflake people charge $8000 for their services, plus another $1000-3000 for a home study. http://www.nightlight.org/wp-content/up ... -facts.pdf (scroll down to "Program Fees")

It's the last point that really bothers me. It's like CollegeMinus. A Christian group puts their spin on something that's not complicated in the first place, and they charge a bunch of money from unsuspecting, vulnerable people.

Not to mention- what are the legalities of this? Does the government treat this like a regular adoption? Do the biological parents have to sign over their rights to the adoptive parents? Is is treated like the sale of property? (correct me if I'm wrong but aren't frozen embryos legally considered to be property?) What happens if something goes wrong? Can the adoptive parents sue the biological parents? Or even make the biological parents take the child back? It's opening a whole can of worms.

[bananacat]

I don't think people here are actually suggesting that these people go out and adopt older kids, only highlighting their hypocrisy for going all out to "save" these embryos while ignoring actual living children.

[Paisy]

As much as I am opposed to the things evangelical Christians often attempt to persuade others to do, this is one thing I'm very much in favor of. Embryo adoption is a godsend (literally? :mrgreen:) for someone struggling to have a baby and not having the eggs and/or financial resources for a fresh IVF cycle of their own. I completely understand why many couples choose to destroy their embryos or donate them to science, but I would love to see more embryos being donated to infertile couples.

[Paisy]

How do you make fun of people who think their reproductive choices make them "speshul snowflakes" when they actually refer to the products of their reproductive choices as "snowflakes" already?

Why would you make fun of someone who is suffering?

[lilwriter85]

(Really NOT trying to sound defensive, but I'm not sure how better to word this) I only know where I'm coming from, but I'm in no way trying to say adoption in general but specifically adopting an older child is somehow easy. It's a very difficult decision and not one that should be taken lightly. My snark is aimed at those who think they're "saving those bunches of cells" while there are hundreds of thousands in foster care who need permanent homes. That said, I think it's AWESOME they're NOT adopting older kids who the fundies would beat down untill the kids complied. ...Just wanted to clarify that I don't believe adoption (of a child of any age) is some simple course of action or one that fundies should be taking at all.

This.

[Glass Cowcatcher]

As much as I am opposed to the things evangelical Christians often attempt to persuade others to do, this is one thing I'm very much in favor of. Embryo adoption is a godsend (literally? :mrgreen:) for someone struggling to have a baby and not having the eggs and/or financial resources for a fresh IVF cycle of their own. I completely understand why many couples choose to destroy their embryos or donate them to science, but I would love to see more embryos being donated to infertile couples.

Please broaden your considerations, embryo adoption is a back-door method of personhood laws.

It's like "adopting" a donor organ or a blood transfusion vial.

I would be in favor of people donating embryos (I don't know if they can already) but saying that they have to be adopted is dangerous territory.

[fundiefan]

Pro - life is becoming taking care of cells and non-existent, possible beings.

When fundies adopt people in need - no, not kids to raise but people to care for - I'll think they're actually 'pro-life'.

People who could survive if only they had the money for the treatment that exists....

If you focus on 'adopting' embryos, yet do nothing whatsoever about those without the money to treat basic, treatable conditions you are not pro life and not admirable.

'Save' an embryo, but do nothing for the 25 year old with melanoma; the 30 year old with diabetes; the 15 year old with CF.

[Paisy]

Please broaden your considerations, embryo adoption is a back-door method of personhood laws.

It's like "adopting" a donor organ or a blood transfusion vial.

I would be in favor of people donating embryos (I don't know if they can already) but saying that they have to be adopted is dangerous territory.

I would agree that requiring embryos to be adopted opens the door to furthering personhood, to which I am vehemently opposed. I don't agree that embryo adoption being an available option does that though. Personally I would also prefer that adoption not be part of the process but I feel that many couples might not be willing to donate if it isn't.

[Paisy]

Several years ago, there was an article by the bioethicist at a local university. It stuck in my head because the concept of embryo adoption seemed so absurd. The author felt that embryo adoption was unnecessary because:

-- When embryos are created, the best-looking ones are implanted. The ones that are left over might be less viable. If you were going to use someone else's genetic material, wouldn't it be better to start with an egg or sperm from a healthy twenty-something, rather questionable seconds from an infertile couple?

There are so many, many reasons for a couple to be infertile and choosing IVF and embryo/egg quality is just one of them (albeit the most important one). Women with perfectly healthy eggs choose IVF because their tubes are damaged or the father may have a low sperm count or because the the quality of the endometrium doesn't line up with conception. You can't assume because a blastocyst was made by an infertile couple that it isn't going to be good enough, because if an embryo makes it to the blastocyst stage it has already won an incredible battle in the attrition war and it is likely to be good enough to make a baby. And yes, eggs from a healthy 20-something are preferable which is why embryo adoption makes so much sense for many couples.

-- It doesn't cost anything to give away your embryos. Well, there's still the clinic fees, but the Stupid Snowflake people charge $8000 for their services, plus another $1000-3000 for a home study. http://www.nightlight.org/wp-content/up ... -facts.pdf (scroll down to "Program Fees")

It still doesn't cost anything to give away your embryos. It is the ones who adopt who are responsible for those fees. Although I think those quoted are a bit exorbitant. There are other embryo adoption programs that don't have crazy fees like that. That's absurd!