The Instigator
sharlock2797
Pro (for)
Winning
23 Points
The Contender
AJPaul17
Con (against)
Losing
9 Points

IVF Debate

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 5 votes the winner is...
sharlock2797
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/28/2016 Category: Science
Updated: 7 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 183 times Debate No: 90337
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (5)

 

sharlock2797

Pro

There are many reasons why a couple are unable to conceive naturally, one in six couples are unable to conceive on their own. (Createfertitlity)
Women can have blocked tubes meaning that eggs cannot pass through the fallopian tubes to enter the uterus.
There are some older couples that still want to have children but their eggs and sperm are unable to fertilize on their own.
Polycystic ovary syndrome is when there is a hormone imbalance that causes woman"s menstruation cycle to be irregular making ovulation less common.
It can allow single mothers or same sex couples to be able to have babies, with sperm donation.
Any unused embryos can be used to donate for research or for couples who don"t have fertilized eggs.
With all of these great benefits and all the many reasons why couples can't conceive naturally, I see no reason why a person should not be allowed to make their own choice in how they conceive their child.
AJPaul17

Con

It's problematic for couples who have trouble conceiving naturally to undergo In-Vitro Fertilization because of the side effects that occur with doing so. These include hot flashes, headache, mood swings, bloating, and more devastating effects. THESE would include OHSS(Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome), pelvic pain, heavy vaginal bleeding, abdominal pains, and weight gains of 10 pounds within a span of just 3-5 days.(http://americanpregnancy.org...)
In addition to that lengthy and risk-implying list, these are the side effects that are added on to natural pregnancy symptoms and side effects. An average pregnancy's side effects include cramping, constipation, breast tenderness, blood in urine, and nausea, and it usually ends with those side effects only; more or less depending on an individual's genetics(http://www.mayoclinic.org...). IVF produces ALL of these average side effects, making it more reasonable to find a different way to produce offspring that has less side effects if you cannot produce naturally.
Debate Round No. 1
sharlock2797

Pro

Actually according to madeformums.com, the natural pregnancy includes many of the side effects you have said occurs with only IVF pregnanies, hot flashes, mood swings, and several other side effects are very common with natural pregnancy due to the hormone imbalance due to any pregnancy. But even with these side effects, many women think that they are worth going through if it means having a child. Pregnancy is never easy natural or not, so some temporary discomfort isn't that big of a problem when creating a life.
Another positive reason for IVF would be that there are is a less likely chance of the baby having any birth defects. Only the strongest embryos are inserted into the uterus for development, so the weaker embryos with more of a chance with a defect would not even be used. This creates a safer pregnancy for mom and baby.
AJPaul17

Con

The advances in IVF are subject to criticism on how humanity is lost when producing artificially fertilized eggs. More religious people believe conception to be a holy act, and is considered to be something that doesn"t deserve to be interfered with by any means. In some cases, the eggs of potential offspring have to be checked in order to achieve maximum possibility of survival. Some aren"t used and they get discarded when it is determined that the egg will not survive. These "unworthy eggs" are then considered to be murdered because of how they are technically living. ( http://fertility.treatmentabroad.com...)
Debate Round No. 2
sharlock2797

Pro

Well I believe in choosing what you get to do to your body, if religious people don't like the IVF pregnancy then I recommend them not having a pregnancy like that. But they don't get to put their opinions in for something that doesn't concern them. It is an embryo, not a living thing. Bacteria is technically alive but no one cries when they kill a bacteria when they wipe down their counters. Discarding a weak embryo doesn't do anything except prevent an unhealthy child from being born. If a baby would be born with possible problems that could be painful or hard for the child, why do the cruel thing and try and make them live with potentially painful problems their whole lives and have them suffer. Yes with IVF the parents get to chose some characteristics that normal pregnancys don't have a say in, but what's wrong with that? Everyone has a preference with some things ( http://chooseagender.com...) I would rather have my first baby be a boy but that doesn't mean if I have a girl first that I will love it any less. Everyone wants something a certain way so what's the problem with actually being able to make a decision like that? Or decide that having a healthier baby is more humane than purposely having a sick child because that's what "God" wants? (Sorry if I offend anyone's religion)
AJPaul17

Con

The older a woman is when going into pregnancy, the lower your survival rates are for the offspring. The health of the women taking part of IVF has a great effect on how the pregnancy will go. In the U.S., from under 35 years of age, the survival rate is in between 41-43%; from ages 35-37 it is only 33-36%; ages 38-40, 23-27%; and if a woman is over 40, 13-18% survival rate. In other words, there"s already more than half-possibility that the embryos will even survive. With multiple implants it is understood that the possibility of success rises, but so does the number of possible children produced at the end of the pregnancy term. If a potential mother wanted to just have one or two children by the IVF process, and doctors added several embryos in order to at least have one child, it could turn out to be over the amount that she is looking for depending on her own genetic hindering. IVF costs a LOT of money as well, the range in cost being from $12,000-$17,000, and many insurance plans do not cover it. So, if the costs are paid for an unsuccessful session, there"s no going back, and the money has already been used. Conversely, if there are more babies produced than wanted or prepared for, then the parents of said offspring would have to struggle to figure out the costs of having an extra child, which they might not be ready for, and they might have to do something else about him/her.
(http://americanpregnancy.org... and http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...)
Debate Round No. 3
sharlock2797

Pro

Well personally I feel like if someone is already spending that much money on conceiving a child then hey might as well get a few more out for the same price. If a person has enough money to spend on an IVF then I think having another baby won't really hurt them that bad. If a couple who is infertile want several children then they have to go through the cost of IVF multiple times, unless several stick, then they get two babies for the price of one! And also, the 13-43% survival rate is higher than the 0% chance they have conceiving naturally. Any way having a baby is expensive, naturally, IVF, surrogacy, its all expensive so might as well try and make it as natural as possible. This way the mother can still go through an actual pregnancy. (https://glowing.com...) These mothers all say that once you are pregnant, the rest of the pregnancy is the exact same as a normal pregnancy, so it is a good alternative to conceiving naturally.
AJPaul17

Con

The advances in IVF are subject to criticism on how humanity is lost when producing artificially fertilized eggs. More religious people believe conception to be a holy act, and is considered to be something that doesn"t deserve to be interfered with by any means. In some cases, the eggs of potential offspring have to be checked in order to achieve maximum possibility of survival. Some aren"t used and they get discarded when it is determined that the egg will not survive. These "unworthy eggs" are then considered to be murdered because of how they are technically living. http://fertility.treatmentabroad.com...

As I have said before, the embryos are discarded after they have been determined "unworthy". After they evaluate by culturing an embryo, they use the better ones of the bunch and implant one of these better embryos into the fallopian tube of the mother in waiting. A problem with this is how well the implant process will go when it is time to develop the selected embryo. (http://fertility.treatmentabroad.com...)
Debate Round No. 4
sharlock2797

Pro

Yes there is a risk with the procedure, it can cause an ectopic pregnancy, or the embryo won't stick, but that happens with all pregnancies. There is always going to be a risk, with anything you do. 2% of all pregnancies are ectopic according to Mrs. Tenore from aafp.org, so it is a common sight to see even naturally. And yes, the stronger of the embryos will be implanted but that is only because they want the best oportunity to that embryo actually sticking, especially if tens of thousands of dollars are being spent to make it work, so that means that a few weak embryos will be thrown out, its not that big of a deal. Overall, I think that IVF pregnancies are a good thing. They are more beneficial than they are harmful. They allow couples who are infertile, to still have babies, they are close to a regular pregnancy once actually pregnant, and many more reasons. I think that IVF would be a good safe alternative for conceiving naturally.
AJPaul17

Con

The law of a country that provides IVF services would end up being put in place to evaluate the legality of the process on the account of offspring production. When a partner is dead, some countries, like Iceland, for example, do not allow the alive partner to be able to use his/her genetic material. In some other cases, like in Belgium and the Netherlands, it is only allowed when a letter is signed by that partner to authorize the usage of their genetic material. When the embryo is created, it also can be frozen for preservation up to a set time in some countries; Brazil has a limit of 3 years, and Spain and Canada has unlimited storage. A couple might need to be married in countries like Turkey, China, and Indonesia, before attempting IVF. In different lands, like New Zealand, it is insisted that you have "stable nuclear family" to raise IVF offspring.

(http://fertility.treatmentabroad.com...)
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by relliston7594 7 months ago
relliston7594
sharlock2797AJPaul17Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:52 
Reasons for voting decision: they were pretty evenly balanced
Vote Placed by taylor_camba 7 months ago
taylor_camba
sharlock2797AJPaul17Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:41 
Reasons for voting decision: The pro side had many good arguments but the con side had more arguments that were backed up by factual information.
Vote Placed by thea_sy 7 months ago
thea_sy
sharlock2797AJPaul17Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Although valid points were made on behalf of pro, con made a more factual argument and had the most reliable sources to back their arguments.
Vote Placed by orutkowski0797 7 months ago
orutkowski0797
sharlock2797AJPaul17Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Shannon had the overall better argument with better facts and details.
Vote Placed by jbrown2047 7 months ago
jbrown2047
sharlock2797AJPaul17Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: More factual