By Erica Pearson | NEW YORK DAILY NEWS | Thursday, March 26, 2015
A DISTINCTION WITHOUT A DIFFERENCE: “Higher Autism Rates among In Vitro Fertilization Conceived Children ‘Might’ be Due to Multiple Births or Complications during Pregnancy that can Follow Such Treatments”
Autism rates are twice as high for children conceived using assisted reproductive technology like in vitro fertilization, scientists found in a new study of nearly 6 million California children.
The researchers didn’t find a direct link between treatments like IVF and autism, however. They say the higher rates can be explained by the large number of multiple births or complications during pregnancy that can follow fertility treatments.
- Mental disability
- Birth defects
- Genetic damage
- Retinoblastoma (eye cancer)
- Kidney cancer (Wilms tumor)
- Multiple births
- Premature delivery and low birth weight
- Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome
- Egg-retrieval procedure complications
- Ectopic pregnancy
- Ovarian cancer
For moms giving birth to just one baby, there’s no increased risk of the neuro-developmental disorder, researchers said.
During IVF, doctors combine eggs and sperm in a laboratory and then implant the embryos that are formed into a woman’s uterus. To increase the chances of pregnancy, doctors will implant up to three embryos — which boosts the possibility of carrying twins or triplets.
2377 Techniques involving only the married couple (homologous artificial insemination and fertilization) … remain morally unacceptable. They dissociate the sexual act from the procreative act. The act which brings the child into existence is no longer an act by which two persons give themselves to one another, but one that “entrusts the life and identity of the embryo into the power of doctors and biologists and establishes the domination of technology over the origin and destiny of the human person. Such a relationship of domination is in itself contrary to the dignity and equality that must be common to parents and children.” “Under the moral aspect procreation is deprived of its proper perfection when it is not willed as the fruit of the conjugal act, that is to say, of the specific act of the spouses’ union . . . . Only respect for the link between the meanings of the conjugal act and respect for the unity of the human being make possible procreation in conformity with the dignity of the person.” CCC 2377
The study was a collaborative effort of researchers at Columbia University, Fordham University, and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. It was published by the American Journal of Public Health.
“While the risk of ART (assisted reproductive technology) with respect to autism appears to be largely modifiable by restricting the procedure to single-embryo transfer, more research is needed to understand the precise mechanisms by which ART and autism are linked,” author Columbia University Professor Peter Bearman said in a release.
Expert warns of IVF timebomb…
Reaping the Whirlwind
By Monsignor Charles Pope, Pastor, Holy Comforter-St. Cyprian, Archdiocese of Washington DC
18th Sunday of the Year, August 3, 2014
A Thai woman who carried a baby with Down’s syndrome as a surrogate mother has vowed to take care of the boy after his natural parents gave him up. The Australian couple left Gammy, now six months old, with Pattaramon Chanbua but took his healthy twin sister. (The biological father, David Farnell, has been convicted of 22 sexual-abuse counts against children.) Gammy has a congenital heart condition, a lung infection and Down’s and is in a Thai hospital for urgent treatment. (David Farnell and his wife Wendy asked for a refund for the money they paid for Gammy after they learned of that he suffers from Down Syndrome.) A campaign to help the baby begun online after Thai newspaper Thairath published Gammy’s story last week. It has raised more than $150,000 from 3,400 donors in 11 days. In Australia,
Gammy’s sister Pipah, father David with his wife Wendy
Prime Minister Tony Abbott expressed his sadness: “I guess it illustrates some of the pitfalls involved in this particular business.” Ms Pattaramon was paid $15,000 to be a surrogate for the Farnells. She was told of the child’s condition four months after becoming pregnant, prompting the couple to ask her to have an abortion. She refused, saying it was against her Buddhist beliefs. (The full article is available here: Surrogate Mother Cares for Disabled Child Rejected by Biological “Parents”.)
Jesus said, “What God has joined together, let no one divide.” But this is exactly what we have done in our divisive and reductionist time. We have done so not only with marriage but also with sexuality, procreation, and the raising of children. God has weaved together sex, marriage, and procreation. But we have separated and isolated them:
1) Regarding sex, we have said that there is no necessary connection between sex and procreation—we have done this with the contraceptive mentality.
2) Regarding marriage, we have said that there is no necessary connection between getting married and having children—we have done this through the widespread use of contraception and now by embracing the notion of same-sex unions.
3) Regarding children, we have even said that there is no necessary connection between having children and having sex—we have done this by in vitro fertilization, surrogate motherhood, and the like. Continue reading
If we approve ‘3-parent children’ we’d be permitting blatant human experimentation on kids
by Wesley J. Smith | Life Site News | June 4, 2014
If the “we never say no” Human Embryo Authority in the UK approves the creation of 3-parent embryos, it would be permitting blatant human experimentation on children.
Indeed, I don’t see any other way to look at it. Note the quote below. From the Associated Press story:
Britain’s fertility regulator says controversial techniques to create embryos from the DNA of three people “do not appear to be unsafe” even though no one has ever received the treatment, according to a new report released Tuesday.
The report based its conclusion largely on lab tests and some animal experiments and called for further experiments before patients are treated. “Until a healthy baby is born, we cannot say 100 percent that these techniques are safe,” said Dr. Andy Greenfield, who chaired the expert panel behind the report.
So, to prevent a child being born with a genetic condition we will endanger that child for a potential lifetime of consequences. Or to put it another way, these children will be life-long experiments, even if they are born safely–a big if. Continue reading