Today’s New York Times features an article ” Picture Emerging on Genetic Risks of IVF ” that starts like this:
Over the past thirty years, in vitro fertilization has been reassuringly safe. Millions of healthy children have been born and developed normally . . .
The article goes on to say that just now we’re starting to see some signs of harms related to IVF. This may be one of the first times we’re hearing of this in the news, but it’s not new. Just off the top of my head, I recall Cheryl Miller revealing otherwise in her 2007 New Atlantis article, ” Parenthood at Any Price .”
The procedures of [assisted reproductive technologies] can harm the very children they help to create. Infertile fathers often pass their infertility down to their sons. Prematurity is now the leading cause of infant mortality in the United States, in part due to the “epidemic” of multiple births to IVF patients. Multiples are twenty times more likely to die in the first month of their lives than singletons; those multiples that survive are more likely to have respiratory difficulties, learning disabilities, and other problems. Cerebral palsy, for instance, has become more common in the United States, even as its major cause, jaundice, has been all but eliminated. And even IVF singletons are less healthy than non-IVF children: they tend to be smaller and are more likely to be born with birth defects, including bowel and genital deformations and eye cancer.
So the evidence doesn’t show that IVF has been reassuringly safe—it’s just been reported that way. For years, mainstream media have not reported the negative effects of IVF for the same reasons they haven’t reported the negative effects of abortion and contraception on women: It’s politically incorrect to report on anything that appears to limit women’s reproductive choices. But all that does is make for less informed choices and a growing number of unhappy women, cheated by the news outlets and women’s health advocates they thought they could trust, who are now beginning to vocalize their discontent.
Dear Reader,
Can I be direct with you?
War abroad. Socialists on the rise. AI upending human life. Endless uproar online. The modern attention economy doesn’t want readers — it wants users enslaved to the tyranny of the present.
First Things is the antidote: literary excellence, timeless truths, and a fixed point of reference in a culture that has lost its bearings.
But we can’t do it without readers like you.
Our goal: Raise $150,000 by November 1 to sustain First Things in the year ahead.
Your gift anchors readers in the permanent things.
Make your Fall Campaign gift now using the button below.
If you have any questions or would like more information, please contact Giovanni Del Piero, Director of the Editor’s Circle, at gdelpiero@firstthings.com or 212-627-1985.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
The Church in the Age of Therapy
In 1966, Philip Rieff wrote in The Triumph of the Therapeutic that “Religious man was born to…
Canada’s Deadliest Blind Spot
On September 20, the Daily Mail ran a story with the provocative headline, “Our 83-year-old Christian grandmother…
The Faithful Joy of Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen
Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen seem to have had little in common. She favored rhinestones; he wore…
