Replies

I realize this isn't how it's done now, but if a couple is fervently pro-life, there's nothing but the cost of the procedure stopping them from preserving the sanctity of life. In other words, it's not the actual procedure of IVF that's a threat to human life, it's the fact that it's more cost beneficial to fertilize a lot of eggs at once, and freeze any "extras", thus opening a door for abuse of the remaining viable embryos.

Yes, exactly. It all comes down to the money.

The other thing GS and others are not mentioning is that they implant multiple fertilized eggs and then if "too many" of them "stick" they counsel a "selective reduction." That is, abort the inconvenient surplus surviving embryos.

It's all a very ugly and callous business that preys on the infertile, promising them a baby of their very own, if they only pony up cash and set aside their morals.

"Selective reduction" is quite rare in IVF. It is actually more common in non-IVF procedures, in which women take fertility drugs, and then are inseminated either the natural way or artificially, with the eggs never leaving the body. This process is a lot less expensive than IVF, and overall is less likely to work at all. However, it also gives much less control of the number of eggs ending up fertilized and implanted, resulting in a significant incidence of dangerously high-number multiples.

Selective reduction can end up saving the lives of the remaining fetuses, since all fetuses are in serious danger when there are too many of them, but it can also end up causing the entire pregnancy to miscarry. It is not something anyone wants to do, and it can be avoided by choosing IVF, followed by choosing to freeze excess embryos rather than transfer a dangerously large number. If the parents feel strongly about not discarding any embryos, they can safely transfer all of them eventually.