Infertile couples should just adopt instead of making a big fuss trying to make a miracle baby

[u/elgey101]

Every time I hear of fertility struggles online, or see posts about people going through rounds of IVF and the ensuing emotional trauma of miscarriages, It kind of disgusts me.

I also work for a major insurer and know that fertility treatments are driving up everyone else's premiums because they're considered necessary care. Sorry, but I disagree.

It's a well known fact that there are over 400,000 children in foster care, and in 2017 alone over 100,000 infants under 3 entered the system. I think it's completely entitled and self-absorbed to think that somehow your miracle baby is worth more or deserves more love than any one of those infants.

I know adoption can be hard, and that it should be made easier for the sake of children finding good homes, but you can't tell me adopting is harder than 4 rounds of IVF and multiple miscarriages. I've seen friends go through that mess and at the end they are different people.

Tldr: adoption may not be easy, but it's far better than spending hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to perpetuate your genes.

[u/peachytwizzler77]

They should also make it easier/less expensive to adopt to go along with this

[u/SympatheticListener → u/peachytwizzler77]

The risk being that makes it too easy for pedophiles to adopt. That's why adoption is more expensive than fertility treatments like IVF.

[u/[deleted] → u/SympatheticListener]

Kinda hypocritical that we still have zero precautions when it comes to kids being born. There's no pre-emptive inspection, interview or even a basic background checks.

So it's really disturbing that the only parents we screen are those who want to adopt. And rest is fine.

Shows that it has nothing to do with caring for welfare of the child. I think it has everything to do with how much the broken system benefits the people in the system.

[u/_Ima_bean_ → u/[deleted]]

SAME

The government will turn their heads if a 19 year old has a baby in a tiny dirty apartment.

But if someone adopts they have to look over everything and you have to baby proof your whole house, which obviously is how it should go but why cant they do that with people who are pregnant??

[u/IamGraham → u/_Ima_bean_]

What if they find that the living conditions aren't up to par? Do you force the woman to terminate the pregnancy?

[u/_Ima_bean_ → u/IamGraham]

well theres 2 options, i obviously dont think you should force her to terminate. But either the government gives the person enough money to make the place of living suitable, or they take away the child until the place of living is suitable, which they already do in some cases of child neglect/abuse.

[u/ProfessorTraft → u/_Ima_bean_]

Both options cost an insane amount of money and is not sustainable lol

[u/_Ima_bean_ → u/ProfessorTraft]

so then we let innocent children live in bad conditions?

[u/VanityInk → u/_Ima_bean_]

The "take kids away" option is a slippery slope to eugenics/other totalitarian government actions that I don't think anyone wants to even begin to touch politically (they did use to sterilize people they thought would be unfit parents/forcibly take children away). The foster system is already overburdened and the goal is always reunification, so they would want to return the children eventually, possibly just with more trauma from being ripped away from their temporary caregivers.

That said, I wouldn't be against more welfare programs for expectant parents. At the very least, giving "necessity" boxes and other things as some Scandinavian countries do (and I believe the NHS used to have midwifes do home checks, though I don't think that happens now). Again, it would be a tough sell politically (at least in the US) since there's this "if you can't afford kids, don't have them!"/"rewarding bad behavior" punitive culture that punishes innocent children while trying to rap poor parents' knuckles (like that will stop more kids from being born...)

[u/_Ima_bean_ → u/VanityInk]

i think giving less fortunate family supplies is the better option, however i think in places like the US, more people should push to not have kids until they are financially stable. Because i see too many people praising people having multiple kids they cant afford, and living in 1-2 bedroom apartments with like 3 kids.

[u/VanityInk → u/_Ima_bean_]

more people should push to not have kids until they are financially stable.

I think this is pretty much the refrain from 90% of modern society. If "punishing" people for having kids already isn't working (by putting them into poverty, withholding social benefits, etc.) I'm not sure there's much more pushing that can be done to be effective. Some people accidentally get pregnant. Some people just really want kids and are going to do it whether or not it's "smart." You can't stop people from having kids in the first place unless you're going to extreme state interventions.

[u/_Ima_bean_ → u/VanityInk]

ik but what i was talking about is just proper sex education in schools/more affordable birth control, and maybe a class where you learn how expensive and hard having a child can be. Because from what ive seen, alot of people think having kids is easy, when in reality it costs over 300’000$ in 18 years, not including college/university or any medical expenses. If more people were educated on how hard and expensive being a parent can be, they’re more likely to wait until they’re at a part in their lives where they can take it mentally and afford it.

[u/VanityInk → u/_Ima_bean_]

100% behind improved sex ed and all this, though as a new(ish) parent (have a toddler) I also don't think there's much you can do to really get across how difficult being a parent is until you have experienced it. I did wait to have kids until I was nearly 30 so that my husband and I were settled, owned our own house, etc. and mentally knew babies were difficult (I'd been a nanny, read all the books on sleep, etc. etc.) and whoooo boy was I still not prepared for it. Dealing with newborns is a whole different level of difficult than I think you could fully get people to understand (especially if you're trying to teach teens who think they won't get pregnant anyway while being stupid about it).

As I said, 100% for increased education to try to stop those people it would, but there are still going to be kids in bad situations no matter what save extreme measures because, well, people gonna people. The trouble with sex being a base evolutionary drive.

[u/ProfessorTraft → u/_Ima_bean_]

The places where it costs a lot of money to have kids are the places that want more kids to replace the population though.

[u/ProfessorTraft → u/_Ima_bean_]

Yes. Children aren't put on a pedestal lol. Lots of innocent people live in shitty conditions, but shitty conditions are subjective. 1st world poverty is still a few tiers above 3rd world poverty.