Adopt an embryo - save a baby

[cmotherofpirl]

LIFE AND TECHNOLOGY
Embryo Adoption: Giving Babies a Second Chance at Life

By Wendy Griffith
CBN News Sr. Reporter

October 11, 2004
CBN.com -- Embryo adoption is a phrase that often causes quizzical looks from those who have never heard of it. Embryos are often talked about in terms of their value in medical research, but more and more couples are discovering embryo adoption --not only to save embryos from destruction, but also to help build the families they have always dreamed about.

Eight-month-old twins Savannah and Morgan are the delight of their parents Jeff and Danette Gillingham of California. The Gillinghams were desperate to start a family, but were unable to conceive naturally. So they prayerfully decided to try frozen embryo adoption.

They adopted embryos from three different families, and on the third try, they had success. Danette became pregnant with twin girls.

"They're gorgeous, and they're healthy, and a joy, full of life, and just so perfect," said Danette. "I mean they're human beings, they're babies. They were frozen. And to look at them now and think that’s what they were, it just boggles your mind."

She went on, "They were frozen five years ago, so they were conceived five years ago, and have been basically waiting in this frozen orphanage for a chance at life.”

Danett’s husband Jeff said, “…I think, to state it simply, in my opinion, words can’t express the blessings of God these girls are.…” He paused as tears came to his eyes. Then went on, “I love my girls...I love 'em."

In America alone, experts say some 400,000 frozen embryos are being stored in hospitals and infertility clinics. They are basically leftovers from couples who have undergone in-vitro fertilization in their attempts to have children. Statistics show only about half of those 400,000 embryos would survive being thawed. Of the 200,000 that would survive the thawing process, researchers say only about 12-15 percent of these babies would actually live. So, that's about 50,000 potential babies.

Rod Stoddart is Executive Director of Nightlight Christian Adoption in California, near Los Angeles. He began the country’s first embryo adoption program about six years ago and named it Snowflakes.

"An embryo is not an egg, not a sperm; it's a baby. It's a baby at its very earliest stage of development. But it's a baby, and the idea of destroying it is the same as abortion," said Stoddart.

Although there are embryo donor programs, he prefers the term ‘adoption’ and explained why.

"We use the term adoption because we think it best serves the children. So, when a child is growing up and they want to know what their story is, we can tell them they were adopted, not donate. The fact is, we were all embryos at one point, and the mission of Snowflakes is that every frozen embryo be given a chance to be born," said Stoddart.

"Since the program began, we’ve had 56 babies that have been born," said Laurie Maze, the Director of a Snowflakes program. "In fact, I just learned of twins this morning that were born Monday, and we have another 18 babies that are still due, between now and February 2005."

The fact that the fact that babies are being born from frozen embryos was never mentioned at this year's Democratic National Convention, as Ron Reagan Junior urged Americans to support the destruction of embryos for stem-cell research.

"No fetal tissue is involved in this process. No fetuses are created, none destroyed. This all happens in the laboratory at the cellular level," said Reagan.

Presidential hopeful John Kerry also denied that embryos are human life. Kerry commented, "I think if we can save millions of lives by doing research on something that may be destroyed anyway, that the balance is important."

With all the controversy and push for embryonic stem-cell research, Maze said she'd like to help more people realize that “these embryos are, in fact, pre-born children, not just little clumps of cells in a petri dish."

"The whole fight is over government funding of the research," said Stoddart. "Private money, the vast majority of the private money, is going to adult stem-cell research, because that's where the results are! You won't hear them talking about how many embryos have to be destroyed in order to get an embryo stem-cell line, not to even mention the fact that there have been zero successes using embryo stem-cells. Zero successes!"

So why are there so many frozen embryos out there? Often during the in-vitro process, doctors will fertilize many more eggs than are needed to implant in the mother, mainly to save the couple's time and money, so they will not have to go through the process again.

That is what happened to Suzanne and Bob Gray of Atlanta, Georgia. They desperately wanted a big family. But they were shocked, during the in-vitro process, to learn that her doctor had fertilized 23 of her eggs!

Suzanne Gray, the genetic mother of these embryos, said, “This was a crisis." She and her husband already had four children, including a set of twins from the in-vitro process. So, Suzanne and Bob felt their family was complete, but they began to pray about what to do with their remaining 23 embryos.

“I actually started sending emails to adoption attorneys around the country, just trying to find out if anyone knew of anyone who worked with embryo adoption," said Suzanne. "One attorney in Louisiana emailed me back, and said, try this organization called Snowflakes."

At the exact same time Suzanne was contacting Snowflakes to help find her embryos a home, a couple in northern Virginia was also contacting Snowflakes and wanting to adopt. Greg and Cara Vest had not been able to conceive on their own. After three failed attempts with in-vitro fertilization, they were hoping frozen embryo adoption would lead to the family they'd always dreamed of having.

Snowflakes matched the two families, and Cara and Greg Vest adopted all 23 of the Gray's embryos. Today the Vests are the proud parents of two-year-old Jonah, the genetic child of Suzanne and Bob Gray of Atlanta.

When asked if Jonah could feel any more like their own if he was genetically theirs, Cara Vest responded, "I can't imagine loving a child any more than I love Jonah. I look at him and I know he's not genetically mine, but it is almost baffling because he is my son."

Greg Vest told us, "He loves to ride the tractor. He says ‘Daddy tractor ride.’ When I come in, that's the first thing he wants to do, every single day, no matter if it's raining, 10 degrees out, no matter what."

"It was in his first words, Mommy, Daddy, tractor,” says Cara.

CBN News asked the Vests, "With embryo adoption, of course, you get to experience pregnancy. How important was that option for you?"

Cara said, "For me, it was such an important aspect of it. I mean, I wanted to experience pregnancy. I wanted to feel the child kick. I wanted to be the one in control of what I ate, and what I was exposed to."

Suzanne Gray, Jonah's genetic mother, no longer has that control. I spoke to her about that, "You've met Jonah, seen Jonah. What is that like for you?”

Suzanne said, "To me, when I look at Jonah, I just see God's blessing. That's really what I see. God has so protected my heart and my husband's heart from any kind of anguish or sadness. I look at Jonah with complete joy. My children look at Jonah with complete joy, because they understand and we understand that Jonah was and is, a decision for the sanctity of life."

When the Vests were asked if their children know that Jonah is their brother, genetically their brother, Suzanne replied, “It's kind of like an ‘extended family’ where my children call Greg and Cara, “Aunt Cara and Uncle Chippie,” which is Greg's nick-name. They're family; it's not that they feel like family - they are family."

Of the 23 embryos the Vests adopted, some did not survive the thawing. Jonah is the only baby born, so far, out of those embryos. But Cara is now pregnant again with Jonah's genetic sibling, another frozen embryo, frozen nine years ago, at the same time Jonah was frozen. There are also three remaining frozen embryos that Cara hopes to mother in the future.

For those not familiar with embryo adoption, this may all seem a little strange. But the Vests see God's hand in it all. Greg said, “I would say it goes back to the failed in-vitro attempts. We were driven toward these embryos. If we'd been successful with those other attempts, we’d have never known anything about the Snowflakes program."

Cara, with tears in her eyes, said, “I thank God. I can't believe He chose me to have this amazing little guy. I mean, it's unbelievable, why did I get so blessed, y’know?”

Jeff Gillingham said, "People ask me how many children do you guys want? I just tell them ‘blessed is the man whose quiver is full.’ There were six kids in my family growing up. I'm not going to limit God. God knows what we can handle, what we have need of. So, if God wants to continue to bless, by all means, I'm not going to stop the blessings of God.” And he added, “I think the ultimate blessing would be that my girls know Jesus Christ, to see that."

Stoddart says as long as there is in-vitro fertilization, there are going to be leftover embryos. He says programs like Snowflakes offer hope, not only for these frozen little lives, but for couples who may not be able to conceive a child any other way.

Although embryo adoption is still in its infancy, children like Savannah and Morgan Gillingham and Jonah Vest are helping people realize that frozen embryos are actual babies just waiting to be born.

For further information about embryo adoption, please go to the web site at embryoadoption.com.

[franciscanheart]

this is all so strange..... cool i guess but strange

[Andrea348]

that's so sad to think of all the babies that are just sitting there frozen, waiting to be adopted ....

[Kilroy the Ninja]

I think that's a wonderful alternative adoption! My only question is, does the church agree? I know they frown on in-vitro, but I wonder how they feel about this sort of an adoption...... hopefully, in the positive.

[Jake Huether]

[quote name='Kilroy the Ninja' date='Oct 12 2004, 10:13 AM'] I think that's a wonderful alternative adoption! My only question is, does the church agree? I know they frown on in-vitro, but I wonder how they feel about this sort of an adoption...... hopefully, in the positive. [/quote]
These were my exact thoughts... so...

ditto.

[jessinoelw]

I thought that snowflake adoption was immoral because it involves in vitro. This was discussed a while back on the Delphi NFP board and the consensus there seemed to be that snowflake is immoral. The idea being that you can't do something evil to bring about something good (I forget what the technical name of that is).

--Jessica

[Oik]

The Church more than frowns upon in-vitro, she teaches against it.

[quote]14. The various techniques of artificial reproduction, which would seem to be at the service of life and which are frequently used with this intention, actually open the door to new threats against life. Apart from the fact that they are morally unacceptable, since they separate procreation from the fully human context of the conjugal act,[14] these techniques have a high rate of failure: not just failure in relation to fertilization but with regard to the subsequent development of the embryo, which is exposed to the risk of death, generally within a very short space of time. Furthermore, the number of embryos produced is often greater than that needed for implantation in the woman's womb, and these so-called "spare embryos" are then destroyed or used for research which, under the pretext of scientific or medical progress, in fact reduces human life to the level of simple "biological material" to be freely disposed of.  [i]Chapter I, section 14 of Evangelium Vitae: On the Value and Inviolability of Human Life (1995)[/i]
[/quote]

Edited October 12, 2004 by Oik

[1337 k4th0l1x0r]

There definitely isn't a clear-cut answer on this. On one side, it involves in vitro fertilization and dissociates procreation from marital unity. On the other hand, the fertilization has already taken place and thus a child is now in existence. The teaching Oik puts up is against couples who choose to produce embryos for the purpose of having a child as many children produced won't grow beyond a few cells. Snowflake themselves aren't producing the children, rather they are giving a child a home. Even if Snowflake is considered 'moral,' it does not free couples that do use in vitro fertilization and produce more embryos than necessary from committing a sin. I will close with this paragraph from the catechism.

[quote name='CCC 2379']
The Gospel shows that physical sterility is not an absolute evil. Spouses who still suffer from infertility after exhausting legitimate medical procedures should unite themselves with the Lord's Cross, the source of all spiritual fecundity. They can give expression to their generosity by [b]adopting abandoned children[/b] or performing demanding services for others.[/quote]

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='jessinoelw' date='Oct 12 2004, 02:14 PM'] I thought that snowflake adoption was immoral because it involves in vitro. This was discussed a while back on the Delphi NFP board and the consensus there seemed to be that snowflake is immoral. The idea being that you can't do something evil to bring about something good (I forget what the technical name of that is).

--Jessica [/quote]
The chilod is already been created, all you are doing is giving it a home.

[Oik]

I disagree with the adoption arguement. The child can only be "given a home" if it is implanted into the womb. Mind you, this may not even be either of the embryos parents. Also, what woulld stop a "progressive" nun from doing this? What would stop a single mother from doing this? What would stop a homosexual couple from doing this?

"Adoption" of embryos creates more problems than is solves. I hope that theologians would argue this case into a definative Church teaching soon.

My view: Eventually the frozen embryos (babies) will die. The process of thawing will kill a large number of embryos (babies) in the thaw process. The rate of sucessful implantation is low and the rate of sucess is very low. The state of freesing the human life is against nature. God did not intend for human beings to exist in a living, almost inanimate state. I pose that the only availble solution is to allow the embryos (babies) to thaw out and return to the only natural state of existance they have left. The effect would be death, but this is not the intended or desired effect. I believe this would be the same circumstance of the Churches teaching on ectopic pregnancy, which allows a doctor to remove infected tissue of the filopian tube, even when a baby is attached to that tissue. The unfortunate sideeffect is abortion and death of the baby, although the intent is to preserve the life of the child and mother.

[Oik]

[quote]What are the chances of a successful pregnancy?
The chance of pregnancy after transfer of frozen embryos is currently 20-25%. However, only about 2/3 of embryos survive the thawing process, and therefore transfers cannot always be performed as planned.[/quote]
[url="http://216.109.117.135/search/cache?p=letting+frozen+embryos+die&ei=UTF-8&fl=0&u=www.embryodonation.org/questions.html&w=letting+frozen+embryos+die&d=BF1F610C9D&icp=1&.intl=us"]National Embryo Donation Center[/url]

[Kilroy the Ninja]

Well, I can see where it could cause more problems. But I guess the next question would be, is it better to let these children die unwanted in a frozen state, or is it better to attempt to revive them and provide them a way to continue with their lives?


Would we hesitate to help revive a child who had fallen in a frozen pond? Even if their vitals had stopped?

Frozen pond children have been revived and gone on to live.

[Guest Aluigi]

homosexuals can adopt already born kids anyway, does that mean take away adoption so they can't get em? no way.

the main concern is that there are tons of frozen babies out there. they can be saved if implanted in the mother's womb. i would say this is not against Church teaching. it would be against Church teaching to get them to fertilize an egg in vitro and implant it, but those who have already been created by this sinful process are now children just the same. like, premarital sex is contrary to Church teaching, but when a child is conceived by premarital sex we must do everything possible to make sure it is not killed by abortion. therefore, we must do everything possible to make sure these babies are not stuck there frozen.

[Oik]

[quote]they can be saved if implanted in the mother's womb.[/quote] As far as I know, the only method of "implantation" is In-vitro, which is clearly condemned by the Chruch. Correct me if I'm wrong, but any method that separates fertilization from the marital act is condemned.

[Fides_et_Ratio]

[quote name='Oik' date='Oct 14 2004, 03:57 AM'] As far as I know, the only method of "implantation" is In-vitro, which is clearly condemned by the Chruch. Correct me if I'm wrong, but any method that separates fertilization from the marital act is condemned. [/quote]
Yes. As hard as it seems. One cannot separate conception from the marital act (as a priest summed up for me: "no sex without babies, and no babies without sex"), if you attempt to separate the two, it is not truly procreation, but merely the transmission of life.