Negative effects of IVF?

Factual Questions
1

I was talking to someone (being ranted at) about IVF treatment.

He was arguing that most of the couples that needed it were too old, and therefore their children would be disproportionately handicapped, or they were people who were unable to conceive due to a genetic defect - in which case furthering their genes damaged the gene pool.

Basically, he was arguing that only those who can breed naturally should be able to do so.
When I argued the point he allowed that those rendered infertile (or ‘barren’) by illness should be allowed to have children.

IVF is an issue I know nothing about tbh.
Is he right that the old and those with bad genes are the main consumers of IVF?
Are there any recognises downsides to the use of IVF?

2

I think my big peeve about IVF would be that it’s not like we’re short of humans on the planet, and you need to go to extreme lengths and have lengthy, costly treatments to add your “special” genes to the gene pool? But I’ll accept that the drive to reproduce is very strong with some people (I’m childless by choice myself, lacking the desire to see my genes copied).

3

His arguments are flawed.

Many women can’t conceive because their eggs lose viability at relatively young ages. Is he seriously suggesting that 30 is too old to raise children? 35? 40? 43? Many parents are able to naturally conceive at that age. Should they stop because he deems their same-aged infertile counterparts too old?

Many couples can’t conceive due to unknown causes. After running all the tests, the cause is still unknown. How can their genes be damaging the gene pool? If their children are also infertile, the buck stops with them, unless they also undergo IVF. If a gene abnormality is severe enough, IVF won’t be successful. If an amniocentesis shows an abnormality such as Down syndrome, the pregnancy can be terminated just as it might be in a non-IVF pregnancy.

Your acquaintance is an arrogant SOB who hopefully will never have to experience infertility, although in his case it might be a better choice.

4

First of all -given the cost, I doubt that allowing IVF is flooding the world with extra offspring. Really well off couples might have the time and inclination to have 2 children (Octomom not withstanding). There’s plenty of people flooding the world the natural way. Actually, the first world and second world are in the midst of a population implosion (except for the USA). It’s only teh third world that is doing the flooding.

Second - the argument is an extension of the eugenics argument. Should we stop or forbid people reproducing if they have known genetic defects - sickle cell anemia, Tay-Sachs, deafness, need glasses, can’t beat the army’s 4F criteria? Where do you stop?

The current stat I saw was that 92% of people who have a Downs diagnosis in Europe opt for abortion; still no flood of defective children. Besides, unless the mother is very old (mid 40s?) the odds of birth defects is still not that significant. Would you forbid someone reproducing over a 1 in 10 chance of defects? 1 in 30? 1 in 100?

As you say, a common cause of infertility is not genetic, and often the cause is not obvious. If the couple CAN have IVF children, then the cause is probably more environmental in the womb. Typically badly genetically defective embryos miscarry very early. SO he would suggest a couple be forbidden to reproduce on the theory that maybe their problem is possibly genetic?

I think I like the current setup. IVF is sufficiently expensive that any couple using it really does want to be parents and likely has the resources to care for offspring.

5

You could argue that undergoing the one cycle of IVF that I did to produce my daughter (in total 6 weeks and around $2000 including government subsidies, male factor infertility both of us un our early 30s) has actually benefited my country. The Australian population is aging fast, and we will need adults of working age in the next 20-30 years in order to help support them:

Barring an unprecedented change in fertility rates, the age structure of the population is likely to stabilise with a far higher proportion of older Australians.

To the OP, the only substantial negative effect we were warned about was a condition called Ovarian hyperstimulation syndromewhich only affects women doing IVF. In the most severe cases it can cause death, but women are carefully monitored to avoid this.

I’ve not read anything to suggest that IVF babies are at a significantly greater risk of genetic defects - this recent article suggests that IVF does not carry excessive risks although there is a slight increased risk of premature birth and of babies with low birth weight for their gestational age (my baby was about average, born 40+3).

Many of the people who need the treatment have either had a condition since they were young which affects fertility (endometriosis, PCOS, tilted uterus, scarred fallopian tubes, varicoceles etc) or the cause is unknown. Many of these conditions may not appear in the next generation. For example, the first IVF baby now has her own child who was conceived naturally.

Does your friend also believe that people should not have the ability to restrict their fertility in the other direction either? Should people who are great at spawning children be encouraged to do this in Duggar-like fashion?

It does smart when people unaffected by infertility are quick to blow off someone else’s life choices. I’m sure the word was not carefully chosen, but I’m a little insulted that Cat Whisperer is ‘peeved’ that my family has been completed this way, when I make no judgement about how she regards her own family choices. What other medical treatment should we deny ourselves because it doesn’t meet others’ standards? Adoption is not an easy option here (much more expensive, and a 5+ year journey). We only intended to undergo IVF for a year - perhaps 4-5 cycles at most, and were planning how we would be happy without a child to raise, if that had been our future.

Never mind! I’m off to snuggle my delicious 6 month old who’s just learned how to hug and kiss back.

6

I know a lot of children who were conceived via IVF, and none of them are handicapped. They are completely healthy, normal kids.

That guy is an asshole of the highest caliber.

I can’t think of an issue in which the saying “mind your own business” more aptly applies.

7

IVF will, hopefully, allow my husband and I to avoid passing on a defective gene: his X chromosome carries a painful genetic disease that he suffers from, and IVF + PGD will eliminate any chance of passing it on. His sister rolled the dice and her son has the disease. We like our method better!