Posted on 08/15/2011 4:12:17 PM PDT by wagglebee
August 15, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Unlike aborting a child conceived naturally, ending the life of an unborn child conceived by in-vitro fertilization (IVF) feels like “just another choice” in an already “consumerish” process, one IVF mom confessed in an article for the New York Times.
“If I had conceived these twins naturally, I wouldn’t have reduced this pregnancy, because you feel like if there’s a natural order, then you don’t want to disturb it,” the mom, “Jenny,” told author Ruth Padawer.
“But we created this child in such an artificial manner — in a test tube, choosing an egg donor, having the embryo placed in me — and somehow, making a decision about how many to carry seemed to be just another choice.
“The pregnancy was all so consumerish to begin with, and this became yet another thing we could control.”
Padawer explained in the article that the couple decided to abort the twin because they felt that, “at best, she could give each one only half of her attention and, she feared, only half of her love.” The couple had to fly in a doctor from thousands of miles away because local physicians refused to abort their twin.
While initially a remedy for IVF “megapregnancies” (when numerous embryos unexpectedly survive the implantation process), so-called “selective reduction” abortions have became an option for pregnancies as common and normal as twins.
But aborting a twin has proven difficult to swallow even for the pro-abortion IVF business culture, and many doctors, while allowing other abortions, still refuse to commit them on a twin. One expert quoted in Padawer’s article recalled how, when the question of killing one twin was put to his clinic staff in the late 1990s, “every one of them - the sonographer, the genetic counselors, the schedulers - supported abortion rights, but all confessed their growing unease with reductions to a singleton.”
Padawer ended the article with the story of two anonymous lesbians who both learned they were pregnant with twins through IVF on the first birthday of their son, who was also conceived by IVF. One woman miscarried, and the other aborted one of her unborn children.
While “grateful” that the abortion was possible, the latter woman, who is due in December, said she still wondered if she chose “the right one.”
“Even as it was happening, I wondered what the future would have been if the doctor had put the needle into the other one,” she said.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
This is the one that’d been trying for six years before she came up with twins, right? You go through all that, get pregnant with twins, and then you abort one...I’m sorry, but you need your ass kicked.
I am trembling with grief and anger. I can’t understand. I don’t ever want to understand how someone could abort a baby but it is even MORE disturbing that you want a baby but decide to abort just one.
OMG! Not a a good example of a good mother in my book INMHO.
Not to share too many details, but I have five kids, two of whom are naturally-conceived twins. My wife and I spent many years being told to accept the ones that we had, and to get used to it. And we would, and them, BOOM, another beautiful kid coming down the pike, so-to-speak. I’d love to have more. And I’m already used to all the buy-one-get-one-free jokes, having used them before. I cannot understand the rationale, for lack of any appropriate word publishable here, that reconciles the IVF thing with abortion. To me, although I do not approve of IVF, as a Catholic, it seems that a couple unable to conceive except through IVF would not be inclined to murder one of their own in this fashion. It is indeed horrifying to me. Words, for once, fail me.
SICK SICK SICK!
One point that hasn’t been emphasized is that they were not the woman’s natural children - they were her husband’s children with some other woman. Maybe that contributed toward making one of them so easily disposable.
Thats ok. We will just abort the other one after its a year old and see if she feels the same way.
“While “grateful” that the abortion was possible, the latter woman, who is due in December, said she still wondered if she chose “the right one.”
Sadly, the aborted one was probably the more fortunate of the two, considering it would have been the coin-flip child of two selfish lesbians. The whole sordid mess makes me phyically ill.
The Catholic Church, and probably others, warned against this kind of consumerist dehumanization of life when IVF started in the 70s.
There, fixed it for you.
I can only shake my head in bewilderment and such awful sadness. If my beautiful daughter had been twins I would have welcomed them both into my life with great joy! What is wrong with people???
I wonder what the aborted child would have had to say if allowed to live and adopted???
I’m also thinking that, when the child that was allowed to live learns that it’s twin was aborted, you gonna have one pissed off problem on your hands. That’s not going to go down easy.
To read this excuse for a woman’s words referring to her killing of an unborn child as a “reducing of a pregnancy” has me so upset that I am thinking very bad thoughts. And, the circumstances of her pregnancy, (IVF), age, etc., have nothing to do with this callous act. A POX on all who side with her “right to choose”. May she live the rest of her own life in misery with the memory of what she has done.
Oh, I forgot to mention that I am an identical twin.
Bat
Unfortunately, you may be right, unsettling as that point is. IMO, she should have thought about that aspect, long before implantation. Or perhaps she did, and didn't think it would be a problem. Of course, it's a woman's prerogative to change her mind...
The law makes lab-based reproduction purely a consumer decision. If a woman thinks she wants to gestate someone else’s children, and has the money to pay, a doctor will implant them. If she changes her mind, and has the money to pay, a doctor will kill them.
The present situation in the US recognizes no ethical or moral constraints, no concern for the child before or after birth, no common-sense standards ... only money. Cases such as the one under discussion are absolutely to be expected.
Makes me think of Huxley’s “Brave New World” with the embryos in jars on conveyor belts. Shudder.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.