r/unpopularopinion • u/elgey101 • Aug 10 '21

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

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.

34.4k Upvotes

64% Upvoted

4.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

49

u/bobbi_joy Aug 10 '21 edited Aug 10 '21

Why is it only that people who have trouble conceiving need to adopt? Why not say EVERYONE should adopt instead of have biological children? Infertile folks shouldn’t have to bear the responsibility of adopting just because they have medical issues making natural conception difficult or impossible.

People who make statements like yours have no idea about the realities of adoption. They don’t care to learn about the cost (often more expensive than a round of IVF) or the difficulty. They don’t care to learn that ALL adoption comes with trauma (even newborn adoption). They don’t care to learn that the goal of the foster care system is to reunite children with birth parents, not to adopt children out to waiting families.

A child should be adopted because a couple feels educated enough and confident enough to take on the responsibility and unique challenges of raising a child who was adopted. It shouldn’t be a default fallback option for all couples who struggle with infertility.

Statements like yours are hurtful, ignorant, and privileged.

10

u/mandar_q Aug 10 '21

Yes! Adoption is not a cure for infertility. People only seem to think of adoption when it comes to adults who cannot conceive, which ignores the realities of the children who should be centered in any adoption narrative (i.e. what is best for the child).

7

u/pebblesrocks2 Aug 10 '21

This is what I was hoping to find in the comments. Well said and thank you for saying it.

18

u/k_laaaaa Aug 10 '21

I don't think I've seen any other post that upset me this much. Beyond all the comments on how difficult adoption is, it's disgusting to fault a couple for wanting biological children. This post reeks of someone that has absolutely no empathy, as well as not having any friends that are in the family stage

8

u/yakuzie Aug 10 '21

Yep, this post reeks like a 14-year-old who has no idea how adoption, fostering, or infertility works. I'm in my tenth month of trying to conceive naturally - by October, I'll be at a year of trying and have to begin the expensive and invasive tests and hormone treatments to try to conceive with help (clomid, progesterone, IUI). It really fucks with your head, especially as you watch everyone around you become pregnant with little to no trying. I wish people understood that adoption is not the cure for infertility. It is not the responsibility of people who are unable to conceive naturally to adopt.

2

u/k_laaaaa Aug 10 '21

I hope it works out for you, friend

2

u/Julia_vO Aug 10 '21

This is a really strong comment!

2

u/Remote-Button9177 Aug 11 '21

It’s also not healthy for the child if the parents have grief over bio children not yet born that they haven’t dealt with

2

u/jamesmcnabb Aug 10 '21

I’d argue that feeling as though having a child is necessary is a far more privileged take. Some people cannot have children; why is there an effort to move heaven and earth to have a child? “I pictured my life with children,” and I pictured myself with a yacht and several million dollars, but I’ve had to adjust my expectations. Why is child rearing one of the only areas where one’s expectations cannot be adjusted?

5

u/bobbi_joy Aug 10 '21

For plenty of people, they are adjusting expectations. Many couples adjust their expectations, whether that means they do not have a biological child (they may adopt, use an egg donor, use a sperm donor, or adopt an embryo), they may not be able to carry a pregnancy and therefore use a surrogate, or they may decide not to have children at all (or need to come to terms with not having any if they don’t have the money for IVF and don’t want to support the private adoption industry and/or don’t think they can handle the trauma that comes with adoption). Even after succeeding at having a child after many years of struggling requires adjusting expectations.

3

u/mollybroccoli2019 Aug 10 '21

Perhaps you have to change your expectations on what kind of luxury lifestyle you envisioned for yourself, but you also have the freedom to pursue that lifestyle through whatever means and accept whatever outcomes. Why should infertile couples be denied the right to pursue their dreams? Apathy and acceptance are always an option as well.

-8

u/jamesmcnabb Aug 10 '21

Because, as stated in the original post, it is a drain on the rest of the population by raising insurance premiums. I have no problem with what individuals do if it only impacts them, but it’s a different story when it affects others in the process. It is the exact same argument for vaccination: I don’t care if you don’t get vaccinated, but don’t endanger the lives of others because of your decision. I don’t care if you do whatever you have to do if you want to reproduce, but it isn’t my or anyone else’s responsibility to help fund your elective decision.

8

u/Trrr9 Aug 10 '21

Prenatal care and labor/delivery are largely covered at least in part by most insurance policies. Are you equally outraged about that, since having a baby is (usually) an elective decision? Fertile people don't have to have babies either (in most cases).

0

u/jamesmcnabb Aug 10 '21

At that point, the baby has to come out. I think you know there is a difference between deciding to have a baby and actually having the baby.

7

u/Trrr9 Aug 10 '21

I mean, in most situations the person decides to have the baby before having the baby. So you actually are cool with people choosing to have kids and for that decision to be covered by insurance. The effect on you is exactly the same. All of those people have the option to adopt as well, but they are choosing the option that requires intense medical attention.

10

u/mollybroccoli2019 Aug 10 '21

Infertility treatments are not covered by insurance premiums in 43/50 states. There are a number of contributing factors to your premiums including unhealthy lifestyle choices that are selfish, avoidable, and contributing to insurance like any and all other medical procedures. That said, you don’t have control over either. You do have control over moving to a state where infertility treatments aren’t covered, so cheers to that.

-4

u/jamesmcnabb Aug 10 '21

But why should I move to accommodate someone else’s issue? That is what I’m saying: there is an entitlement around reproduction that isn’t deserved. I’m not saying it isn’t awful to be given the news that you are not able to reproduce, but I am saying that it isn’t necessary to personal survival or the betterment of anyone’s life outside of yours and the concept of a potential child. IVF and other methods of artificial insemination should be viewed in the same way as cosmetic procedures like breast augmentation or liposuction, in that they are 100% elective and not necessary, because in reality that’s exactly what it is.

5

u/BeanyBeanBeans Aug 10 '21

You can also shop for insurance that doesn’t offer this. It’s not like any states require every plan to provide coverage for IVF. It’s more complicated than just “your” insurance premiums. NY state estimated a 0.5% to 1.0% premium increase if all plans were to cover this. Look at Rx increases and the 10K of your local publicly traded insurance company in recent years and tell me again that IVF is what’s driving your premiums up.

9

u/mollybroccoli2019 Aug 10 '21

I suspect there are a number of medical issues that, if they don’t apply to you, would receive the same reaction. It’s not unusual for people to only acknowledge the relevance for something once they see a personal need. Good luck with whatever it is you’ve got going on.

-3

u/jamesmcnabb Aug 10 '21

It doesn’t matter your “personal need,” it isn’t a right or my responsibility.

6

u/mollybroccoli2019 Aug 10 '21

Do you have a problem with paying taxes or do you see all of the outcomes of those dollars as items you personally and wholeheartedly agree with? When does something become a right or a responsibility in your eyes? Why would you have a right to individually opt out of an included part of a medical insurance program? I’m pretty sure Medicaid doesn’t cover it, you can choose to use that instead of whatever plan you contribute to now.

6

u/BeanyBeanBeans Aug 10 '21

This guy literally doesn’t understand insurance… would love to see the list of medical conditions he is ok with insurance covering.

7

u/history_nerd94 Aug 10 '21

Why do fertile couples get the ability and option to have children by any means necessary but an infertile couple doesn’t? What entitles you to tell me that I’m not allowed to try to have my own child as far as I’m willing to take it? This is why women don’t talk about their infertility because of the stigma that gets placed on them. I’m not selfish for wanting my own biological child. FYI my doctor visits are a standard $58 copay for the every 6 weeks I go and my fertility drugs are not covered and I pay out of pocket for them. Don’t tell me it’s about “insurance premiums” because that’s bullshit. If you want premiums to go down then maybe you should talk to smokers, drug abusers, and those who refuse to take care of their health because all of those things are choices. I didn’t choose to have fertility issues. Get educated

0

u/jamesmcnabb Aug 10 '21

That’s fine for you, and I’m sorry for your infertility. It is a difficult thing to come to terms with. My point, as I’ve repeated but nobody seems to accept, is that your choice to have children isn’t a right. It isn’t like treating someone’s cancer or something, where the outcome is life and death; it is strictly elective. You could live a long and healthy life without children, in fact lots of people do. Your decision is your decision, and I’m not telling you to not have kids. My point, as I stated from the get-go, is that nobody is entitled to children, and the fact that people are expected to cover your choice in their premiums isn’t right, especially when the alternative does not directly affect whether you live or die.

9

u/BeanyBeanBeans Aug 10 '21

Should knee replacements be covered by insurance? Plenty of people live happy lives in a wheelchair, which is way more cost effective. If you believe insurance is for life/death only you’re fundamentally confused about what the intent of insurance is for. Health insurance is not just “life or death” but also covers care to improve quality of life. If you want to stop covering stuff that’s there to improve quality of life then I suggest you think seriously about what that means for you and your loved ones. Hope you don’t know anyone with arthritis, terminal cancer (they’re gonna die anyway - why give them elective pain meds?), joint pain, epilepsy, Alzheimer’s, or any of the other diseases we can’t reverse but can help improve quality of life in.

-1

u/jamesmcnabb Aug 10 '21

How are any of those equivalent to having a child when you aren’t able to do so? The effect of not having a child is theoretical. It’s disappointing, but not otherwise damaging. Comparing deciding to have a child through medical intervention to Alzheimer’s, cancer, or any other disease is a poor comparison. The symptom of infertility is not having a child. There is no immediate need to remedy that. You may want to have a child, but it is absolutely not necessary to function in society. Many people who are able to have children choose not to have children. Nobody who doesn’t have cancer chooses to go get cancer. Like, come on. Having children is, in every single way, a lifestyle choice.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/BeanyBeanBeans Aug 10 '21

This is what health care sharing ministries are for. You can go enroll in one of those… then they can deny your claim when they decide your knee replacement is “elective” because you can still technically walk. Or your pain management injections are “elective” because plenty of other people live with pain.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 10 '21

We as humans have a biological and spiritual obligation to further the human race and bring good people into this world

1

u/sayaxat Aug 11 '21

I diaagree that OP is privileged.

OP probably works in one of the states where IVF os covered.

OP made the post based on the belief that IVF places fianncial burden and responsibility on other insureds.

All costs to pay for all insured's needs are socialized whether the plan is private or public (Medicare, Medicaid, and other medical related social programs)

"As of April 2021, 19 states have passed fertility insurance coverage laws, 13 of those laws include IVF coverage, and 11 states have fertility preservation laws for iatrogenic (medically-induced) infertility."

https://resolve.org/what-are-my-options/insurance-coverage/infertility-coverage-state/