Fertility treatments and overpopulation

@ehBeth,

ehBeth wrote:

that goes to my opinion that counselling would be more helpful than fertility treatment

Having infertility treatment is not a decision that's taken lightly and throughout, one is counselled extensively, because there are no guarantees. It was one of the hardest yet easiest decisions to take – and fortunately for us it worked.

I’ve received counselling for other events in my life that didn’t work so I am not the greatest believer in counselling helps/cures all. Counselling may work for many for many different circumstances – but for me, it didn’t, tho I do believe it can help a lot of folk.

Having been through IVF and having wished to have children, I have to disagree that counselling would have been a better choice than the chance to have my son. I lost one of the embryos but was fortunate enough that I was able to carry the other and have my son.

A relatively simple medical procedure (tho conceiving a child is not in any way simple for those of us with medical issues, and is quite extraordinary) gave me the good fortune to give life.

Considering counselling a better option, to persuade me/help me/others accept that not having a child is better for the overpopulated planet, is something I cannot fathom. I don’t feel it is selfish and I don’t believe it is self-indulgent to wish to have a child.

Of course, we are all built differently and have different needs.

I can’t imagine that counselling would have been as helpful to me as having a child has been.

Our embryos, which were frozen, were donated to research after 5 years - which again was an extremely hard decision to make – I’d like to believe now, tho at the time of donating this was not the reason for the decision we made, that this has been helpful in even the smallest possible way for someone else or for research.

0 Replies

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

ehBeth wrote:
Among other things, I think it is an enormous waste of medical resources as well as a waste of research funds.

So if it's a waste for the world as a whole, who else gets harmed?

What lives are saved by fertility treatment?

1 Reply

@engineer,

Quote:

...We're not cartoon communists saying "ah comrade, you must spend your money to help others instead of pursuing your desires!" How is spending $5K on a fertility treatment more selfish than spending $5K on a motorcycle? You earned it, spend it how you want.

No, we're not "cartoon communists", but sooner or later we (I mean all of us on planet earth) are going to have no option but to acknowledge that we (collectively) are going to run out of space, water & food if we keep populating at the rate we are & take some collective responsibility. It may not be in our life time. No one is trying to force us to act for the common good, not now, anyway. It wouldn't surprise me though, if down the track we won't have too much individual choice in such matters.

But in terms of the discussion so far ...
As a teacher I have known & worked with so many unhappy, neglected & unwanted & sometimes disturbed children over the years.
I've often wished that more potential parents gave a little more long-term thought to the matter before acquiring that baby they might even have desperately wanted at the time.
Although cost is by no means my major worry, quite a few of these unhappy children have cost the community considerably more than than what it cost their parents to give birth to them. And not just financially.
Of course I am not referring specifically to children born as the result of fertility treatments. I just wish people would consider more than their own particular wants when deciding whether to reproduce or not.

-

3 Replies

@msolga,

That part I agree with completely. (I don't think anyone here so far disagrees, either.)

0 Replies

@sozobe,

sozobe wrote:

Why reasoning the want away -- not thinking about it, reasoning it away -- was something that was good/ noble/ necessary.

I've reread this a few times and still don't understand what you're asking. I'm not sure what is supposed to be good/noble/necessary.

2 Replies

@msolga,

I agree with you that there are many - too many children out there that are not wanted, neglected, and worse - abused. However, one has to distinguish between what percentage of these kids are really wanted an/or which are born via IVF.

The entire discussion about overpopulation should have included all parents, not singled out couples who seek fertility treatments, while excluding the ones who barely make ends meet with a brood of six.

Or it should have been a discussion about pro kids vs. no kids.

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

Poor analogy, chocolate is a reason to live!
<kidding, get your point>

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

Is this related to the original bad/self-indulgent post? (I'm still not making the connection, but I'm trying to)

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

Well, it started here:

ehBeth wrote:

In the discussions I've had with people - it comes down to "want", usually one person with a big case of "I want".

That's why the real-life discussions usually don't last long. I don't sugarcoat my reaction to that "I want", or "Steve wants", or "Debbie wants".

From there, you talked about how you wanted kids, but you reasoned that want away.

When I said "why?" you talked about thinking about it. You also said that you decided you wanted to be a parent without having a child, which still comes back to want.

I clarified that I meant why did you feel the need to reason your want away? What was bad about the desire to have a child? Or good about depriving yourself if you did want to have a child?

No response to that directly until now, your chocolate analogy is maybe meant to explain the same thing. Although it changes tacks -- from deciding you didn't want to have a child, to wanting something but failing to rationalize it. In the latter case, you do want it, you just deprive yourself. For some reason.

And that's what I want to know. What is the reason?

If you want the chocolate, why the need to reason that want away? What's wrong with having chocolate?

Or... what's wrong with having a child if you want one?

0 Replies

@patiodog,

I can answer that. Love. Not cynically, but really, a fruition of love that is already there.

Or, cynically, perceived love, sometimes to keep the mate.

Or, probably most often, because you find yourself pregnant and don't want to abort for religious reasons or no reason but acceptance.

1 Reply

@ehBeth,

ehBeth wrote:

What lives are saved by fertility treatment?

None. But why do they have to? Lots of things we do don't save lives, and aren't usually considered a waste.

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

Got to say, giving birth is natural. If it happens via medical means, that's a fixit.
I've my limits on understanding that, but I do understand it.
I've never really gotten surrogate moms.

I think I understand Pdawg more from surfeit, to me, of efforts, rather than having a child at all. I get not wanting to do that, but not really understanding discomfort with people doing that, having a child at all, in this burgeoning world.

1 Reply

@msolga,

msolga wrote:

No, we're not "cartoon communists", but sooner or later we (I mean all of us on planet earth) are going to have no option but to acknowledge that we (collectively) are going to run out of space, water & food if we keep populating at the rate we are & take some collective responsibility. It may not be in our life time. No one is trying to force us to act for the common good, not now, anyway. It wouldn't surprise me though, if down the track we won't have too much individual choice in such matters.

As the late economist Benjamin Stein used to say: "If something can't go on forever, it will stop." And that's all there is to it. If our growing population is going to outrun our planet's capacity to sustain it, it will stop growing whenever that happens. It doesn't matter if we make a conscious choice to stop it or not. So why bother?

msolga wrote:

As a teacher I have known & worked with so many unhappy, neglected & unwanted & sometimes disturbed children over the years.

I'm sure you did, and I agree with your later point that parents should consider what they're getting themselves into. But I don't see how that will be an unusual problem for the children we talk about here. Their parents, after all, are willing to spend thousands of dollars to bring them into existence. So we can assume, at least as a general rule, that the children won't be unwanted.

1 Reply

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

ehBeth wrote:
What lives are saved by fertility treatment?

None. But why do they have to? Lots of things we do don't save lives, and aren't usually considered a waste.

I think that research funds around fertility have better places to go. I think Questioner explained it quite well.

1 Reply

@CalamityJane,

In terms of negative effects upon environment......I think especially of things like greenhouse gases.....at present it seems likely to me that population in the US is logically the place where population should be curbed immediately.

I suspect with china and India industrializing and consuming things like cars at the rate they are doing, that is in the process of shifting....but it's you guys, as far as I know, who are creating and causing the most environmental destruction right now.

We are on a par, almost, I believe.....but so far there's too few of us to have a big influence on the world...

As I said, that's changing and places like Russia and the former eastern bloc have certainly had a big influence because of the dirtiness and lack of regulation of their industries, and forest degradation in many countries is a major concern.....but I think you wrong in failing to focus upon US population as a problem.

2 Replies

@ehBeth,

ehBeth wrote:

I think that research funds around fertility have better places to go. I think Questioner explained it quite well.

I disagree. Fundamental research around fertility, which is generally payed by the taxpayer, go to no particular place at all. That's what makes it fundamental. Applied research on fertility treatment is largely payed for by the companies' customers, who pay willingly and evidently don't want it to go any other place.

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

So how is it different from a medical intervention that extends someone's life?

If we block IVF on the basis of "it's a medical intervention that increases the population" then it seems we should block "medical interventions that prevent a decrease in population."

3 Replies

@DrewDad,

If we're getting down to the existential crisis of reproduction...

...then what's the point of any of us being here?

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

You're arguing with the wrong person, I'm not against a medical fixit, me of all people, and did not say that. I spent a decade in med research and have talked about that, am I a complete cypher to you?

1 Reply

@sozobe,

sozobe wrote:

"I want" doesn't seem like an intrinsically bad reason to me.

To the contrary, it seems like an intrinsically good reason to me. Indeed, for me as an orthodox Utilitarian, "I want" is the root of all intrinsically good reasons for doing anything.

Obviously, nobody has to convince me that fertility treatments are bad. But if anybody wants to, he or she would have to convince me of me three factual points: (1) Having a child deprives someone else of something they want. (2) That someone wants that something more than the would-be parents want their own child. (3) That someone cannot have that something unless the would-be parents forgo the fertility treatment. (Yes, points #1 and #3 are somewhat redundant. So be it.)

0 Replies

Fertility treatments and overpopulation

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know