Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 18 of 44

Thread: "The IVF revolution is money badly spent"

  1. #1

    Thumbs down "The IVF revolution is money badly spent"

    Hi everyone,

    I just read this article on the Herald Sun Website, after being contacted by some friends. Please take the time out to read what has been published about IVF.

    It implies that the babies that are conceived through IVF are flawed and that it is foolish to pursue IVF- see quote below!

    "The fact is that we are paying to create a faulty gene pool, turning Darwin's theory about survival of the fittest on its head.



    What other species would be so foolish as to encourage this form of un-natural selection? "


    Please let the Herald Sun know what you think of Jill Singer's article.

    Cheers

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    692

    Default

    Just in case anyone feels the need to express their disgust at the ignorance published in this article, here is Jill Singers direct email address

    [email protected]


  3. #3

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Langwarrin. Victoria
    Posts
    1,654

    Default

    You guys beat me to it...just read this disgusting article while eating lunch out down the street...what an absolute f%%%n moron she is. Oh and by the way how can she be quoting statistics about how ICSI creates inferility in male offspring when ICSI hasnt even been around long enough to have created offspring of reprodutive age...TWIT!!!!

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    South West Sydney, NSW
    Posts
    2,454

    Default

    I am planning to respond to that article but I still don't think I've calmed down enough to be able to post anything and I read it at 9am this morning... I'll see how I feel in a few more hours.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    in the national capital
    Posts
    1,682

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by melbel View Post
    You guys beat me to it...just read this disgusting article while eating lunch out down the street...what an absolute f%%%n moron she is. Oh and by the way how can she be quoting statistics about how ICSI creates inferility in male offspring when ICSI hasnt even been around long enough to have created offspring of reprodutive age...TWIT!!!!
    Couldn't agree more - unless of course there are 8 year olds out there having kids and the British tabloids haven't caught up with them yet.

    I really want to write to her and let her know that DH wears glasses too - should we not have kids incase they inherit his wonky eyes! Because heaven forbit they should have to wear glasses too (which of course is a drain on the medical system)

  6. #6

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    5,310

    Default

    Ah, I'm gonna get shot down BUT scientifically it is defying Darwins Survival of the Fittest by enabling couples who may not have been able to have children to have children.

    NOT that thats a bad thing BTW, because we are defying survival of the fittest ourselves PMSL.

    But I think thats the theory.

    I don't agree its creating 'flawed' children, or anything like that, and I think anyone who does is grossly misinformed but the theory behind their argument is somewhat valid.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,547

    Default

    Darwin's theory of evolution and natural selection is just that - a theory. It is not a code to live by, nor is it universally accepted as being necessarily correct either.

    Sounds like she certainly has an axe to grind with the IVF "lobby"...she makes them sound like some kind of evil organisation. The trouble with limiting access to medicare funded IVF or not allowing women over a certain age to access it is that where do you draw the line? It is not fair, or equitable, to allow some people to use it and not others. And the trouble with her 'faulty gene pool' argument is that it is not just babies conceived through IVF or other fertility treatments that can have problems - there are many naturally conceived babies born every year that are premature, or have some sort of birth defect or disability, or simply require extra medical attention in their first few days/weeks/months of life. Is she suggesting we favour babies naturally conceived over those conceived with IVF? That's ridiculous of course, but it shows the flawed logic of her argument. How much further should we take it? Aborting all foetuses, naturally conceived or IVF, that show a disability or medical defect, simply because it is going to cost the government money to look after them when they are born? Completely disregarding the wishes of the parents? Of course not. How nice for her that she can "sympathise" with parents who have difficulties conceiving. Obviously she has not been in that situation herself, or even knows anyone who has, otherwise she wouldn't have written such an insenstive and poorly though out article.

    ETA: like I said before I edited my post, I would not bother writing to her. She will be expecting it and it will not change her vile opinion. She doesn't deserve the attention that she no doubt is expecting due to her very calculated and "controversial" article.
    Last edited by bon; March 26th, 2009 at 02:37 PM.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Queensland
    Posts
    2,039

    Default

    What a load of bs! This idea of survival of the fittest and talking about stats of ivf babies I would be interested to see how these compare with stats for babies who are conceived without the help of ivf? Who says ivf babies are not as fit!!

    Why don't we stop public health care for the elderly because they aren't as fit and for ppl that write stupid articles like this or why don't we just get rid of public health care and why not all goverment assistance? That way only "the fittest" will survive!

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Melb - where my coolness isn't seen as wierdness
    Posts
    4,361

    Default

    My IVF son survived because he was the fittest. He survived and grew despite being in a completely unnatural environment.

    He survived being poked and prodded, kept in a petri dish for 5 days, and transferred via a catheter. He survived when he only had a 25% (or so) chance of surviving. He made it when 13 other embryos didn't make it.

    So nothing this woman says impacts me and how I feel about my IVF child.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    melbourne
    Posts
    339

    Default

    What a judgemental misinformed idiot! I am an emergency nurse who just yesterday was looking after a 19 year old IV drug user who is pregnant with her "third child". Her other two children have been placed in care but not before long stays in hospital (and probably ongoing) for complications arrising from the mothers drug and alcohol abuse while pregnant - and she wants to talk about costs to the public health system.
    I just tried to write an email but like bon said she doesn't deserve my time plus i'm way to angry!.

    xxBella

    I was thinking exactly the same thing sushee!

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Bunbury, Western Australia
    Posts
    3,963

    Default

    Ugh, what a silly woman.
    This quite really got to me..
    That means more than a quarter required expensive, taxpayer- subsidised neonatal care. And what of the untold heartbreak and failures?
    Because it's not heartbreaking to TTC for months on end and still have AF show up? Surely that would be just as heartbreaking as IVF.

    and this

    As recently as 2005, the AIHW was made aware that the perinatal death rate was 7.3 deaths per 1000 births in even the most responsible forms of IVF - where a single embryo was implanted (rather than several in order to increase the chances of a live birth).
    Single ones are implanted because they have a hirer success rate of not getting lost later. It's much harder to carry twins, triplets or quads to fill term than a single baby. Wouldn't that add to the death rate, losing 4 babies at 18 weeks, for example??

    Blah. What a cow.

  12. #12

    Angry

    Can someone PLEASE tell me that this twit has not ProCreated herself! Someone this ignorant, uninformed and selfish shouldn't be left with the responsibility of another human life!

  13. #13

    Default

    It's absolute crapola - what about those of us with secondary infertility? I was quite capable of naturally conceiving my own very healthy, very fit babies (and it appears ironically that I still am!) until 'one of those things' caused me to lose most of an ovary and blocked my left tube - HOW has that had any impact on the genetics of my children??!! As my FS once put it, we had a road block and needed to get around it.

    This sort of ignorance makes my blood boil!!!

    Leasha - not going to shoot you down babe but I must admit I am surprised by your post.
    Last edited by Willow; March 26th, 2009 at 07:02 PM.

  14. #14

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    gold coast
    Posts
    132

    Default

    Well, I spent the day calming down after reading the article and have just sent my comments to the Herald Sun and directly to Jill (thanks for the email address Baby dreamtime)

    I have never, ever responded to a journalist before. I am completely outraged.

    If the government really wants to save money then cut the baby bonus. But I find the whole issue of taking IVf off the safety net a complete contradiction to the baby bonus. On one hand they are saying we need to encourage population growth but at the same time taking away one of the means to do it ????

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    1,539

    Default

    I know that many of you already know this, but the main reason (in my opinion) why this and other IVF (both pro- and con-) have been in the papers recently is because the government is considering excluding IVF from Medicare/the Safety Net or limiting Medicare for IVF. Please see this thread and write letters explaining why IVF should continue to receive Medicare support: http://bellybelly.com.au/forums/long...y-net-ivf.html

  16. #16

    Default

    Absolutely unbelievable!!!!!! It makes my blood boil. Sushee you said it so well ..

    My IVF son survived because he was the fittest. He survived and grew despite being in a completely unnatural environment.

    He survived being poked and prodded, kept in a petri dish for 5 days, and transferred via a catheter. He survived when he only had a 25% (or so) chance of surviving. He made it when 13 other embryos didn't make it.
    That is exactly how I feel about my little bubs and he/she isn't even here yet. How dare they imply we are less deserving of having a baby because we have had trouble concieving naturally. What an absolute joke!

    A friend at work said to me 'I am so excited you are going to have this baby because I KNOW how desperately this child is wanted and is going to be so loved by you and your hubby'. We can and will tell our children that they were wanted to much that we did whatever it took to bring them into our family. SO STICK IT Jill what ever your name is!

    Rach xx

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ella'sMum View Post
    Can someone PLEASE tell me that this twit has not ProCreated herself! Someone this ignorant, uninformed and selfish shouldn't be left with the responsibility of another human life!
    She has written a book called "Immaculate Conceptions", and according to the review on the Age website, she has had an abortion at age 20, and a daughter at age 23.

  18. #18
    paradise lost Guest

    Default

    How is Darwin relevant anyway? Is she also going to suggest we abort all genetically damaged babies that were naturally concieved and leave all those who slip through the testing net or are injured at birth out in the bush to die and so rid ourselves of them? It is so low-brow-journo to compare a theory relating to millions of years of evolutionary development to 20 years of medical advance.

    Never mind. SHe HAS to have a strong and offensive opinion, because lets face it, she's not going to get readers with an intelligent and thoughtful style.

    Bx

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •