IVF Should Be Banned: Responding to Objections about Recent Criticisms

I published a short Corner post last week that argued the commentary about AOC preparing to freeze her eggs ignores the important underlying question: Should IVF be allowed? My answer is no. The commenters largely expressed firm disagreement. I’ll address the most common objections and explain why I think they’re wrong. For some of these, I have lumped together comments that were thematically similar.

1. I’ll begin with the most substantive objection by quoting part of one comment: “Guard against the abuse. . . Minimal stimulation protocols, freezing eggs instead of embryos, and donating unused embryos rather than discarding them are all real options. That’s a regulatory and practice question, not an argument against IVF itself. What’s actually left is a values claim: that conception mediated by a lab is wrong, independent of waste or engineering. That’s a legitimate personal conviction, but it’s just that: an opinion, not an argument that binds anyone who doesn’t already share the premise.”

About the Author

Abigail Anthony

Abigail Anthony is a staff writer at National Review.

Featured Tags

Manage following

IVF

I published a short Corner post last week that argued the commentary about AOC preparing to freeze her eggs ignores the important underlying question: Should IVF be allowed? My answer is no. The commenters largely expressed firm disagreement. I’ll address the most common objections and explain why I think they’re wrong. For some of these, I have lumped together comments that were thematically similar.

1. I’ll begin with the most substantive objection by quoting part of one comment: “Guard against the abuse. . . Minimal stimulation protocols, freezing eggs instead of embryos, and donating unused embryos rather than discarding them are all real options. That’s a regulatory and practice question, not an argument against IVF itself. What’s actually left is a values claim: that conception mediated by a lab is wrong, independent of waste or engineering. That’s a legitimate personal conviction, but it’s just that: an opinion, not an argument that binds anyone who doesn’t already share the premise.”