IVF as we know it could be over...(long)

armywife76 · November 2011

beginning with my state. We will vote Tuesday on Initia.tive 26, the Person.hood Amendment, which is packaged as an anti-abortion bill but has drastic and far-reaching consequences for infertility patients. Mississippi has been targeted due to our deeply conservative population and if passed, will fuel the movement for this initiative, which currently has petitions in all 50 states.

Person.hood USA?s Keith M.ason said on Friday that Mississippi?s Initia.tive 26, ?looks like it?ll be the first one to pass in this country.?

I am saddened by how this controversy has divided my family and friends, and even more so by the thousands of deserving parents will not have access to unrestricted infertility treatment if this passes. There is a lot of misinformation out there about this bill, but here are some facts:

Due to the term ?person? referring to an embryo at the moment of conception (sperm/egg joining), anything that interferes with or endangers this process will be ILLEGAL beginning 30 days after the election if passed:

? IUD?s, including Mirena

? The Morning after pill (RU-486), even in the event of rape or incest

? Cryopreservation of embryos during IVF for future cycles/siblings

? Embryo adoption

? PGD and the unrestricted fertilization of eggs to improve IVF success rates

What will be left up to the courts and legal system to decide: (I know, scary!)

? Which oral contraceptive pills will be considered as creating an ?un-hospitable? environment for implantation and therefore banned?

? What is meant by the new requirement for limited fertilization? (I?ve read 1-3 eggs or only as many as the woman plans to transfer). This will drastically decrease success rates, while increasing the risk for OHSS and high-order multiples as all fertilized eggs will be required to be transferred back into the uterus.

? Will criminal investigations be allowed in the case of ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages, as these embryos will now be entitled to all the rights of citizens?

? Will doctors be at risk of prosecution for the natural arrest of embryos during the IVF process?

There are really more questions than answers, but the effects will forever change the way IVF is performed and make it unaffordable for many patients in our non-mandated state. RESOLVE?s official stand is in opposition of this initiative as are the American Congress of OB-GYN, the MS Medical Assoc. and the MS Nurses Assoc.

Please help us fight this initiative by passing this information onto your family and friends, post on facebook, other forums, and especially educate those who are Mississippi residents to Vote No.to 26.

Please read this letter, as I think it sums it up best. I wish I could state what it has meant to me to be blessed with my son through the miracle of IVF as poignantly as he does.

Thank you, ladies! I know all of you understand how important it is for all of us to stand up for ART. Please feel free to discuss here and PLEASE, PLEASE pass on this information and the link to this father's letter:

https://www.facebook.com/notes/tony-giachelli/where-i-stand-on-initiative-26/10100111661561196

Mrs.Babbsy · November 2011

My brother told me about this, From my understanding OH wants this as well, but it's not on their ballets. How on earth can they do that? I will be anxious to see how Tuesday turns out.

JessandJeremy · November 2011

This is scary.

armywife76 · November 2011

Mrs.Babbsy:
My brother told me about this, From my understanding OH wants this as well, but it's not on their ballets. How on earth can they do that? I will be anxious to see how Tuesday turns out.

It has been put on the ballot in other states such as CO, but has been defeated (though narrowly in some cases) so far. I saw on FOX News this morning that it is in the works to have it on the ballot in four to twelve more states in 2012.

Here is a recent news reports if you're interested:

https://video.foxnews.com/v/1258997852001/future-of-abortion-at-stake-in-mississippi

Mrs.Babbsy · November 2011

Thank you! I am very interested.

naflmj · November 2011

This really just disgusts me. I am fairly confident it wouldn't pass in MA but it is scary that it could anywhere.

MrsOjoButtons · November 2011

I had ER three days ago and haven't visited my embryos since. I could be prosecuted for child neglect if this were to pass. Once we put the extras in a freezer, that could be construed as attempted murder, since, you know, live children can't be stored in a freezer. As of now, I would be considered a mother of 11 dependents, so my kids had better qualify for college grants, oh, and welfare and WIC. Since the only thing keeping my "children" alive is the vitrification process, state funded health insurance programs should cover it. While we're at it, if a woman has a miscarriage after lifting heavy objects, vigorous exercise, exposing herself to someone with the flu, we'll prosecute them. If a miscarriage happens after sex, we'll prosecute the man and the woman for murder. I also want social security benefits from my deceased embryos if they don't survive thaw. This whole thing is ridiculously short sighted and vague.

armywife76 · November 2011

MrsOjoButtons:
I had ER three days ago and haven't visited my embryos since. I could be prosecuted for child neglect if this were to pass. Once we put the extras in a freezer, that could be construed as attempted murder, since, you know, live children can't be stored in a freezer. As of now, I would be considered a mother of 11 dependents, so my kids had better qualify for college grants, oh, and welfare and WIC. Since the only thing keeping my "children" alive is the vitrification process, state funded health insurance programs should cover it. While we're at it, if a woman has a miscarriage after lifting heavy objects, vigorous exercise, exposing herself to someone with the flu, we'll prosecute them. If a miscarriage happens after sex, we'll prosecute the man and the woman for murder. I also want social security benefits from my deceased embryos if they don't survive thaw. This whole thing is ridiculously short sighted and vague.

So true. Who knows how far this could go if left up to the legal system to interpret the meaning of 'person' in this case? It is really terrifying how many people don't understand the implications.

LisaandBryan · November 2011

I really doubt that this will pass in any state. Even if it does, do you really people are gonig to prosectured for it? They have better things to do. I wouldnt' be that worried.

etoyama · November 2011

This is insane, and absolutely terrifying.

gringa78 · November 2011

LisaandBryan:

I really doubt that this will pass in any state. Even if it does, do you really people are gonig to prosectured for it? They have better things to do. I wouldnt' be that worried.

I think women (and families in this case) should always be worried, and always be vigilant, when it comes to laws that infringe on our personal freedoms. The passing of small laws here and there chip away, bit by bit, on our rights to our bodies and the choices we make when it comes to childbearing. I am always concerned when this type of rhetoric gains momentum...I never take Roe v. Wade for granted. All it would take is a conservative majority to overturn a lot of laws protecting women's rights...and there is a lot of money behind conservative politics. We have to play an active role in the political decisions that occur in our country.

laura1 · November 2011

naflmj:
This really just disgusts me. I am fairly confident it wouldn't pass in MA but it is scary that it could anywhere.

This...but isn't this what they thought about Prohibition back in the day? I find this whole thing totally ridiculous!

armywife76 · November 2011

LisaandBryan:
I really doubt that this will pass in any state. Even if it does, do you really people are gonig to prosectured for it? They have better things to do. I wouldnt' be that worried.

I don't know if it will pass, but if it will anywhere, it will be here. My own OB is a major proponent, speaking all over the state in favor of it. I have friends and family who, despite knowing what we have gone through, feel that the chance to end abortion is worth the small percentage of IF patients that could be affected. There are signs posted in support on every corner in my town and none in opposition. I can only hope the level-headed will see through this. I don't know how likely it is that prosecution would happen (no one can predict that), but I know it would make doctors take a hard look at how they practice and it WILL end cryopreservation, as freezing 'people' is not legal. All I can do is help spread the word, vote, and hope for the best.

LisaBRM · November 2011

LisaandBryan:

I really doubt that this will pass in any state. Even if it does, do you really people are gonig to prosectured for it? They have better things to do. I wouldnt' be that worried.

Never say never. This bill scares the hell out of me.

desabean · November 2011

LisaandBryan:
I really doubt that this will pass in any state. Even if it does, do you really people are gonig to prosectured for it? They have better things to do. I wouldnt' be that worried.

From everything that I have read it is actually expected to pass. I feel very strongly that women need to take on a stronger role in advocating for our reproductive rights and our bodies and stop just assuming other people will do the right thing. To not worry about this is a complacency that I think belongs back in the 1950's.

epphd · November 2011

I'm sorry, but the best I can say is this is

so.freaking.dumb. SO DUMB.

Poor Mississippians.

ETA: oh, get ready for the period police. Or the m/c police. Make sure that you didn't do anything to prevent your potentially fertilized egg for implanting. And if you have a m/c, get ready to be investigated. Brilliant. This is just brilliant.

On the bright side, think about how many jobs could be created if every menstruating woman is a potential murderer. Confused

LisaandBryan · November 2011

Wow, sorry guys just my opinion. I will fully admit I have never heard of this before posting so sorry about that. But again, I just find it hard to believe that this will pass in this country. I guess I'm confused because in a country where abortion is legal, how could this become a law, that doens't make sense to me.

epphd · November 2011

LisaandBryan:
Wow, sorry guys just my opinion. I will fully admit I have never heard of this before posting so sorry about that. But again, I just find it hard to believe that this will pass in this country. I guess I'm confused because in a country where abortion is legal, how could this become a law, that doens't make sense to me.

While abortion is a federal right, states have the right to place restrictions on it. This type of bill is also used in order TO challenge RvW. They drafters know that if it is passed it will be fought up to the SCOTUS. The idea is to eventually gain enough momentum to have RvW overturned.

oooCarrieB · November 2011

They have a lot more information on the Resolve website. Very scary stuff!

Quizzle · November 2011

LisaandBryan:
I really doubt that this will pass in any state. Even if it does, do you really people are gonig to prosectured for it? They have better things to do. I wouldnt' be that worried.

Even outside of fertility medicine, think about the implications for birth control. Many forms work by also preventing implantation. Therefore,. they would not be allowed. Bye bye IUDs!

I'm personally not so sure it would outlaw vitrification of embryos, but certainly couldn't there be an issue with the loss of embryos during the IVF process? What about the ones which are considered too low quality to freeze and are discarded? What if they die during the growth process? What about when you're done, would you not be able to donate them to science (like we intend to) or discard them?

I think the embryo adoption part may be reaching a bit.

But certainly the whole thing is terribly badly thought out. The implications for miscarriages and stillbirths are frightening. And what about ectopic pregnancies, selective reduction, or severe fetal defects? Are we going to deny families the choice to terminate a pregnancy that may not be fatal but the child will have no quality of life? I'm pretty sure none of the people favoring this bill will want to pay for the care of those children.

It's seriously scary.

superned · November 2011

This scares the hell out of me. I've had an ectopic pregnancy and if this were law, it's likely that I would have died because of where it had implanted. What doctor would have operated on me, knowing that both of us could be prosecuted for murder or manslaughter? It boggles my mind that any woman of child-bearing age could vote for this. Or any man with a wife/daughter/sister whose life would be at risk.

steveandkim2 · November 2011

This absolutely disgusts me. Our son is a FET miracle, and since we don't want to risk anything with another fresh cycle (developed ohss both times), our remaining frosties are our only chance to give c a sibling. Let's hope saner heads prevail.

armywife76 · November 2011

Quizzle:

I'm personally not so sure it would outlaw vitrification of embryos, but certainly couldn't there be an issue with the loss of embryos during the IVF process? What about the ones which are considered too low quality to freeze and are discarded? What if they die during the growth process? What about when you're done, would you not be able to donate them to science (like we intend to) or discard them?

I think the embryo adoption part may be reaching a bit.

The truth is that no one really knows exactly the implications this may have on current IVF practices, but will be left up to the legal system to determine what is meant by 'person' in the setting of IVF and what rights these fertilized embryos have under our constitution.

Here is a quote that gives an idea as to the rationale: (c/p'd)

Would the Personhood Amendment prevent embryos from being frozen at all?

Conceivably, yes. Cryopreservation has advanced dramatically, but there is still some risk that a microscopic embryo will be damaged or stop developing as a result of the process.

If the Personhood Amendment requires that doctors make every effort to preserve the lives of both mother and baby in the event of even an ectopic pregnancy, where the baby has no chance of survival, it?s reasonable to suppose that freezing embryos would be prohibited as being too dangerous. That would imply that doctors could attempt to fertilize no more than one or two eggs.

A medical procedure which offers no direct medical benefit to a newborn baby, and which carries a 50% risk of killing that baby, would clearly be considered child endangerment. However, if we consider embryos and fetuses to be people whose rights are equivalent to those of a born baby, how could such risks possibly be acceptable in the scenario of freezing an embryo for later usage?

Typically, embryo donation involves cryopreservation, although one could assume that fresh-cycle donation would be unaffected.

And here is my OB (a major supporter) explaining his interpretation as an outright ban on cryopreservation:

https://parentsagainstms26.com/2011/10/13/dr-eric-webb-on-gallo-radio-major-changes-to-ivf/

MrsOjoButtons · November 2011

I wonder if it would be a crime to have sex while pregnant...or if my husband could be charged with indecent exposure to a fetus if we knock boots. I'm certain it would be illegal for a pregnant woman to (gasp!) have a few sips of wine, or even too many Taco Bell meals, because the fetus trumps the mother. It's such a slippery slope, and given how vague the language currently is, not a single person can assume things won't start to lean that way. On the flip side, since GMOs are being found in fetuses, my unnamed, unborn fetus could sue Monsanto. Awesome. What about illegal immigrants? Since their fetus is yet to be born, how do we decide if the fetus is or could be American? How do we determine citizenship? It's so dumb.

Yellow_Daisy · November 2011

gringa78:
LisaandBryan:

I really doubt that this will pass in any state. Even if it does, do you really people are gonig to prosectured for it? They have better things to do. I wouldnt' be that worried.

I think women (and families in this case) should always be worried, and always be vigilant, when it comes to laws that infringe on our personal freedoms. The passing of small laws here and there chip away, bit by bit, on our rights to our bodies and the choices we make when it comes to childbearing. I am always concerned when this type of rhetoric gains momentum...I never take Roe v. Wade for granted. All it would take is a conservative majority to overturn a lot of laws protecting women's rights...and there is a lot of money behind conservative politics. We have to play an active role in the political decisions that occur in our country.

Gringa I totally agree. I don't live in Mississippi but I've been spreading the word through Resolve's advocacy efforts to try and get people to vote no on this. If one person I've sent the Resolve info to sends it to one person who votes no in Mississippi then I will feel like I've done something.

alchris · November 2011

epphd:
While abortion is a federal right, states have the right to place restrictions on it. This type of bill is also used in order TO challenge RvW. They drafters know that if it is passed it will be fought up to the SCOTUS. The idea is to eventually gain enough momentum to have RvW overtturned.

This is exactly true. They're looking for an "in" with voters to start a slippery slope toward overturning Roe v. Wade. They don't care about who they hurt in the process. Their demands seem horribly ignorant, but really it's a brilliant way of getting their goal in the end. It's disgusting.

alchris · November 2011

MrsOjoButtons:
I wonder if it would be a crime to have sex while pregnant...or if my husband could be charged with indecent exposure to a fetus if we knock boots. I'm certain it would be illegal for a pregnant woman to (gasp!) have a few sips of wine, or even too many Taco Bell meals, because the fetus trumps the mother. It's such a slippery slope, and given how vague the language currently is, not a single person can assume things won't start to lean that way. On the flip side, since GMOs are being found in fetuses, my unnamed, unborn fetus could sue Monsanto. Awesome. What about illegal immigrants? Since their fetus is yet to be born, how do we decide if the fetus is or could be American? How do we determine citizenship? It's so dumb.

LOL. You're exactly right, unfortunately.

armywife76 · November 2011

Yellow_Daisy:

Gringa I totally agree. I don't live in Mississippi but I've been spreading the word through Resolve's advocacy efforts to try and get people to vote no on this. If one person I've sent the Resolve info to sends it to one person who votes no in Mississippi then I will feel like I've done something.

Thank you, thank you! Wish I could give you a huge hug right now

Quizzle · November 2011

alchris:
epphd:
While abortion is a federal right, states have the right to place restrictions on it. This type of bill is also used in order TO challenge RvW. They drafters know that if it is passed it will be fought up to the SCOTUS. The idea is to eventually gain enough momentum to have RvW overtturned.
This is exactly true. They're looking for an "in" with voters to start a slippery slope toward overturning Roe v. Wade. They don't care about who they hurt in the process. Their demands seem horribly ignorant, but really it's a brilliant way of getting their goal in the end. It's disgusting.

I think they're also risking a lot because they could lose spectacularly in the SC too. But it's disgusting they're willing to take that risk. I'm forever convinced that the people behind this sort of bill only care about the unborn.

And gee, I wonder if my husband and I could have been charged with child endangerment... I developed a HUGE SCH after we had sex at 11 weeks, and ended up on pelvic rest my entire pregnancy. It didn't clear up until 26 weeks...

pandabearlover · November 2011

I think I would be serving a life sentence for murder (or, more likely, dead) for what I did to Quincy in February (I had him removed, inside my uterus, to save my life). I guess, if I was in Mississippi, I would have had to wait 3 weeks and hope I didn't hemorrhage before then (even though he would not have lived with no amniotic fluid to develop his lungs) or have them cut into my uterus and have them remove him so he could have a chance at "life" at 21 weeks gestation. But by doing that I had a 50% chance of bleeding out or ending up on a vent for a long time.

Way to make me feel awesome for putting my life and my daughter's quality of life above my son's. (and, according to this bill, murdering him).