8 ms·
why adoption instead of IVF?
by internet_user 4y ago
why adoption instead of IVF?
- mrcartmeneses 4y agoIt gives a child a normal childhood and saves them from a system of foster care that can never fully meet the needs of a child?
- nxm 4y agoMuch respect to those who adopt, but bloodlines matter
- decafninja 4y agoYeah, this is not to be underestimated in the context of Korea and Korean culture. Thankfully, in our case, our parents don't care, and neither do we. I'm also an only child, as is my wife, so this means both our branches of our families' genetic bloodlines are effectively ending (albeit the onus for this is on the male side). But again - we don't care.
- tstrimple 4y agoIf you place value on them and decide they matter, sure.
- mullingitover 4y agoCounterpoint: our species has very little genetic diversity, we’re all pretty closely related. The odds that there’s there’s something unique or special about any one person’s lineage is pretty low.
- decafninja 4y agoIn this context, it's probably more of a matter of personal and familial pride and honor rather than promoting the benefit of humankind.
- hypertele-Xii 4y agoThe more genetically similar we are, the more socially valuable the relative differences become.
- mullingitover 4y agoIt depends on the difference, because genetic differences aren't always beneficial. The Hapsburg Dynasty's Charles II famously had an inherited birth defect due to the heavy inbreeding[1] among the ruling class, for example. It was of no value to anyone. The true reason for valuing lineages is more about social rank/class protectionism. [1] https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/distinctive-habsburg-jaw-was-likely-result-royal-familys-inbreeding-180973688/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/distinctive-habsbu...
- internet_user 4y agoThe value of that intermarriage was ability to maintain an empire of significant power and influence, as well balance relationships with nearby royals, who were all cousins. "no value" here is probably in tens, maybe hundreds of trillions of dollars in the present time PPP basis.
- nunb 4y agoI heard the most bizarre & unexpected opinion first-hand from an obgyn. Prior to this I was firmly in the nurture camp of nature/nurture, but this obgyn's opinion on adoptions shocked me out of my complacency. I am hoping Sapolsky's latest book may shed some light on the subject without the Wade/Murray "bell curve" implications.
- decafninja 4y agoCurious as to what you mean. I think you're implying that the personality makeup of the adopted child that comes from his/her biological parents is not to be underestimated? Is that really a questionable or controversial topic though? The thought has occurred to me. I would describe both my wife and I as being stable mannered and not prone to rash decisions. Odds are a biological child of ours might resemble that personality. I also acknowledge a child we adopt may have had biological parents with very different personalities than us, and therefore the child may be very different from us in personality. At the same time, I don't believe that just because the child's biological parents might have been wild and crazy, the child is doomed to the same fate even with our care.
- JamesBarney 4y ago> At the same time, I don't believe that just because the child's biological parents might have been wild and crazy, the child is doomed to the same fate even with our care Tell me you haven't read many behavioral genetics papers without telling me you haven't read many behavioral genetics papers :).
- d0100 4y agoSome wild and crazy behavior comes by because of genetic "features" that translate into mental issues But I do believe nurture can help to prevent or exacerbate those issues
- random314 4y agoWhat was the opinion?
- Bancakes 4y agoNurture > nature. Bloodlines are an archaic form of currency since there's no influence/treasury/crown to inherit.
- green-eclipse 4y agoIVF is incredibly expensive and certainly not guaranteed to be successful. Might have something to do with it.
- nxm 4y agoIf a couple wants something that is priceless so badly, then it’s worth even the multiple rounds of ivf
- decafninja 4y agoIn our case, we are not that desperate. We do know some friends that were though, and did do exactly that. Also IVF is significantly cheaper in Korea? We know some friends who are low income that had the procedure done there.
- yardstick 4y agoMove to the UK and IVF is free for your first child. After that it’s about £15-20k per attempt.
- ridgered4 4y agoThe same is true of adoption unfortunately.
- decafninja 4y agoWatching her friends and my friends' wives go through it, we've been scared off. Add to that, the usual HN phenomenon that we're observing how the world and our countries (USA & Korea) seem be going down the toilet, and that makes us feel hesitant to bring a new human being into the world, especially when there are kids already here that could use a loving family.
- DSingularity 4y agoWhy not one kid and try to use the excess parenting bandwidth to equip him/her to face the new world and maybe even fix it a bit?
- Dalewyn 4y agoNot to detract, but "one kid" would only make the problem worse because a woman needs to give birth to at least two children in order for population counts at large to maintain parity. That is, one kid per woman halves the population. If the axiom is at least maintaining, ideally growing the population, every woman needs to give birth to at least two and ideally three or more kids. Of course, this isn't to say I'm telling other people what to do regarding offspring, because I hate that kind of intrusive attitude. I've already decided I'm having no kids, because fuck the human world; and anyone who comes bitching at me about it one way or another can take a hike and pound sand. So I'm not going to be hypocritical and turn around and tell other people what to do in the bedroom. But if the purpose for all the noise behind childbearing is to take population count trends out of the negatives, advising "one kid" not only doesn't help solve the problem but actively makes it worse.