hey kel,
i was also read that if the were IVF they she would have told people- but she's saying they were not IVF??
she also said she is blessed to be able to concieve naturally??
I need assisted conception and DO NOT find it insulting
I need assisted conception and DO find it insulting
I DONT need assisted conception and DO NOT find it insulting
I DONT need assisted conception and DO find it insulting
Registered User
hey kel,
i was also read that if the were IVF they she would have told people- but she's saying they were not IVF??
she also said she is blessed to be able to concieve naturally??
Registered User
It is only speculation that she had IVF. I therefore don't feel right speculating about how that makes me feel. If it is was proven, then i would feel much more comfortable discussing the issue.
Registered User
angelina or not (dont really care if they used it or not, doesnt affect my life!!), I do know people who have to go through the hell of IVF and I do find it silly that anyone would put themselves through this if there weren't a need.
Just one step closer to desinger babies - or two at once for convenience sakes.
Registered User
I don't think we should be using them as an example as the IVF twins were a rumour and I do believe that she would have been open about it if it had been done through IVF (what has she got to lose).
Registered User
Will IVF clinics actually agree to treat a fertile couple? Does infertility have to be "proven" (for want of a better word) before a couple can undergo treatment?
Registered User
I would imagine that in the US clinics treat anyone who is able to fork over the cash.
Whether Brad & Angelina did in fact use IVF is irrelevant, I don't see the harm in discussing it as a hypothetical.
I don't find it insulting that a fertile couple would choose to go through IVF unnecessarily (although I do wonder at anyone who perceives it as a 'convenience'), although I do believe that they should either pay a premium to allow more resources to be allocated to genuine needs cases, or not receive any Medicare rebates and under no circumstances be given priority treatment over those in need.
I don't see it as an ethical issue in the same way the concept of 'designer babies', as having two babies at once by choice seems vastly different to the future implications of either modifying or rejecting genetic material to enhance 'desirable' traits or remove perceived 'undesirable' traits.
However, I have not been down the IVF path so my perspective might be completely different to those who have.
♥ BellyBelly's Creator ♥
I am not playing on gossip - what I actually asked in the poll was:
IVF in healthy couples for the sole purpose of twins - do you find it insulting?
Not, do yout think it's true or not....
Kelly xx
Creator of BellyBelly.com.au, doula, writer and mother of three amazing children
Registered User
Maybe it was just the way you worded your post......
The word is that Angelina Jolie's twins are IVF babies and that she is actually perfectly fertile - but wanted twins so ordered them via IVF.
I'd like to hear what the women with genuine IVF cases think of this - I'd imagine it is very insulting.
Registered User
I dont have conception issues but I dont find it insulting.
I think that if someone has the desire to have twins bad enough to go through the ordeal of IVF then it is their wish.
Registered User
I don't find it insulting, i find it strange that a couple who can conceive naturally would willingly go down the path of ivf just to have a higher chance of conceiving twins, triplets etc. Its odd but not an insult, to me anyway.
Registered User
that would be interesting to find out whether any IVF clinics would treat fertile couples to conceive twins, or for people who would be willing to pay huge sums of money (maybe not in Australia but overseas)
slightly off topic but interesting how suddendly so many hollywood people are having twins "naturally".
Registered User
Well I'd like to thank the people on this thread that have helped me
hollybolly for her awesome post back there, yep I'm not insulted but it raises emotion.
BW for this line: None of us NEED to be a mother. But that biological urge is there for a reason. If it weren't there, where would the human race be?
And minky for making me think, so that next time when I'm sooo envious sitting next to that heavily pregnant lady at the IVF clinic I will wonder what her story is and know that maybe it's her little IVF miracle after say seven tries? Thanks so much minky.
And for the record I asked my DH his opinion of all this and he wasn't offended at all and wondered if he was missing something? I suppose his opinion influenced mine because I never know what I'm feeling :/
But I know that if I had to wait in line because someone fertile had pushed in in front of me I would be ropable.I have never had to wait at my clinic?
When I thought "journalist" I thought some middle aged bloke not a mother with a toddler.
Registered User
I think that's how the rumour started, elixa. Many hollywood women are having twins in their late 30s and 40s, and are openly admitting to using IVF in order to get pregnant. This starts an assumption that all people having twins used IVF and off we head down the slippery slope to "no fertility problems, they used IVF merely to have twins". People forget that sometimes twins happen naturally. Sure, not as frequently as with IVF, but it still happens.
Smithy, thank you. While undergoing IVF I was always pretty determined to make people understand the realities of it. Now that I've come out of the other side with success, I'm even more determined. I know there are times you just can't stand up and be heard because the emotions are still too raw.
BW
Registered User
Hi girls,
I have not contributed to this thread because of exactly what you said here BW.
but I think I can now as many of you lovely ladies have expressed some of the emotions I have been feeling.I know there are times you just can't stand up and be heard because the emotions are still too raw.
I don't find the concept of having IVF to produce twins "insulting" but I do find it upsetting. I didn't vote as it is not quite the right word for me. In some ways it is resentment that someone can do what I can't but that they still want more. In some of the posts in this thread people have said everyone has the right to choose how they conceive. And that upsets me because no-one who has to do IVF would choose to do it. being infertile takes many choices away as you are forced to do somethings you would never wish to do. Just a few I can think of:
* stick yourself with needles a few times a day
* subject yourself to anaesthetic and surgery
* use your sick leave/annual leave/days off for doctors appointments/surgery
* ask your co-workser to cover for you for appointments
* sometimes have to tell your boss and co-workers about needing to do IVF
* work your social life around surgeries
* have sex when necessary (and not when you want to)
I am one of the lucky ones as medically I find IVF a breeze and have never had any problems, although I have had to undergo an unnecessary procedure. But I find the social aspects and the lack of choice and the things that are imposed on you to be really difficult. I guess it is having choice and control taken away. So for someone to still have control and choice over their fertility but then still want more, it upsets me. Yes, partly the green eyed monster but hopefully we are all allowed a little of that.
Can I say also that "assisted conception" is a business in America and some other countries, that does not resemble even slightly what we are able to do in Australia. In the US, as well as being able to transfer two embryos, you can buy eggs, sperm and surrogacy. In most states of australia, you cannot do any of that. I think the journo was right in deciding not to publish the story, even if only for the reason that it gives the wrong impression of what can be done in australia. I get a bit annoyed, with anything in the media that comes from the US and they try to localise it. We are very different societies with different laws and norms.
Why would anyone care one way or the other?It does not change IVF in an way.They got the money to do it and to take care of the kids.Whats the big deal?I'm sorry.I just find no point in getting into stars "private life".
Registered User
The opposition is that they could be consuming resources that are needed by women with a genuine need for IVF.
How could they be "consuming resources"?This is mind boggling.How do you know that they can have children?I have not seen their medical record.Has anyone else here?Besides all that they are NOT "consuming resources that are needed by women with a genuine need for IVF".The are paying for it with their own money.They may or may not be using their own sperm and egg.If not they paid for what they used.As far as the doctors and staff thats their job.Thats what they do.Its not any diffrent than you getting it.Who cares if they are stars.They are still human.Does that mean that NONE of us should be using IVF?If they are "bad" for having IVF so are the rest of us.Its their choice.I'm happy for them.They have two healthy babies.Good for them.
Registered User
There is only a limited number of clinics and doctors, the waiting lists are huge! It doesn't matter that they pay cash, if they take the spot of a woman in genuine need, it is wrong.
The original question about about fertile couples using IVF for the purpose of getting twins, please stick to the question. Your response was probably offensive to many who have struggled through the IVF process.
Bookmarks