Fairchild 1

Savannah Fairchild
English 4H
Mrs. DeBock
12 November 2015
In most cases, the idea of a couple becoming pregnant is easy and almost effortless.
Occasionally, however, some couples look at the idea of getting pregnant as a monumental
obstacle that is almost impossible to overcome. The first step for many couples who cannot have
a baby is to get professional help or find an alternative way to have a child. Some will look at
adoption as their alternative, and others will turn toward fertility clinics. Fertility clinics give
infertile couples an ostensible wide variety of miracle techniques that excite the couples and
give them hope. Couples look to fertility clinics in order to receive fertility drugs, planning
calendars, different techniques to try and increase the fertility, but specifically for in vitro
fertilization. Fertility clinics may seem like the perfect, harm free, non-threatening alternative for
infertile couples; however, they are outrageously expensive, they waste embryos and eggs, and
have no guaranteed success rate.
If one is not exceedingly wealthy, it is more than difficult to just up and pocket the costs
of in vitro fertilization. This leads back to the idea of in vitro fertilization causing a superior
race. A real world example is Kim Kardashian and Kanye West. They have decided to undergo
in vitro fertilization because it is too difficult for Kim to have a baby. In another sense, this goes
to show that the wealthier one is the more feasible and plausible in vitro fertilization is due to the
high prices. In vitro fertilization comes with several different processes and cycles; each one
having its own separate cost. When one decides to undergo the tedious procedure of in vitro

Fairchild 2
fertilization, one knows that the process is more than expensive. Most people also understand
that most, if not almost entirely all, insurance companies do not cover in vitro fertilization. As
Carisa said, Our insurance company did not cover in vitro fertilization whatsoever
(NewCarisa). Each cycle has an individual cost, the medications that go along with in vitro have
their own costs, ultrasounds and blood work have separate costs, and egg retrieval and transfers
are separately priced. The course of in vitro fertilization itself is exhausting. Carisa, a woman
who underwent IVF, described having to get acupuncture over three times in order to relieve her
stress from the cycles she was going through (NewCarisa). The acupuncture was not included in
the cost of the IVF cycle, resulting in Carisa having to pay it out of pocket. The acupuncture
appointments cost Carisa a total of around $300-$400 dollars. As one can see, in vitro
fertilization is too costly for a procedure that does not guarantee a successful pregnancy. Another
woman, in New Zealand, underwent in vitro fertilization and was told the estimated cost of the
procedure would be anywhere from $8,000-$11,000 dollars (IVF Mumma Vlogs).
In any in vitro fertilization case, it is almost guaranteed that the specialist will take as
many eggs as possible from the mother in order to try and get at least one to fertilize. After that, a
doctor will most likely inseminate more than one egg into the womans uterus to ensure that at
least one of them will attach to the uterus wall and grow. What happens to the other fertilized
eggs that were implanted in the womans uterus? If they do not implant and attach, they die in
the womb. Many arguments support the clause that fertility clinics are in a way related, or
sisters, with abortion clinics (Kinsley). Yes, abortion clinics eliminate the fertilized embryos,
however, fertility clinics are basically doing the same thing and they do not even realize it.
Kinsley also describes that if anti-abortionists are viewing abortion clinics as a disgrace, they
should be viewing fertility clinics in the same way because they are doing the same thing.

Fairchild 3
Fertility clinics are not intentionally destroying embryos to try and ruin a pregnancy;
nevertheless, they are wasting vital, limited eggs by inseminating all of them into a womans
uterus. Another problem that fertility clinics run into is the conflict between them and the federal
government. Due to a ban on federal funding for fertility clinics, the clinics have to take it upon
themselves to raise money for research (Brownlee). In this case, the fertility clinics have to go
through trial and error in order to find more successful techniques. This results once again in the
wasting of embryos and eggs. If a fertility clinic has little experience in a certain area of in vitro
fertilization, then they will have to do experiments in order to gain the knowledge and experience
they need to perform tasks properly.
Lastly, IVF has no guaranteed success rate. Even fertile couples know that their chances
of becoming pregnant through sexual intercourse are not even guaranteed. In vitro fertilization is,
currently, the best way to become pregnant if a couple is infertile. However, it still does not work
most of the time. Alternative procedures have been created in order to help those who still cannot
conceive a baby through in vitro fertilization (Brownlee). An example of an alternative to in vitro
fertilization would be cytoplasmic transfer. This is the process in which a doctor takes an infertile
egg from the mother and a fertile egg from a donor. The doctor then takes the cytoplasm from the
fertile donors egg and injects it into the infertile egg. This has been done in the past, specifically
in 1997. A doctor by the name of Jacques Cohen performed cytoplasmic transfer on several
willing patients. The babies were born successfully, which caused an uprising of excitement for
infertile couples; however, in 2001, embryologists reported that they had endowed the children
with extra bits of a special type of genetic material, known as mitochondrial DNA
(Brownlee). Mitochondrial DNA, or mtDNA, is the DNA from the donor. This means that, since
the doctors accidently injected too much mtDNA, these children have genetic material from the

Fairchild 4
mother, the father, and the donor; therefore giving them three parents. This proves that even
though couples and doctors may seem prosperous, ultimately, complications always occur.
Another example of complications is the fact that fertility drugs have been proven to have an
effect on a females risk for ovarian cancer (Cunningham). While obviously there are other habits
that contribute to the increased or decreased risks for ovarian cancer, taking larger doses of
fertility drugs is one of the main factors. Fertility clinics are knowingly giving their patients these
drugs in order to help increase their fertility, however, also increasing the risk for cancer. As
stated throughout the paragraph, in vitro fertilization is not guaranteed to work nor is it always
beneficial for the baby or the mothers body.
In closing, in vitro fertilization and fertility clinics are not good investments for those
who are infertile. They are not good investments because they are outrageously expensive, they
waste embryos and eggs, and have no guaranteed success rate. All in all, in vitro fertilization has
been proven to cause more harm than good. The risks, the amount of time and money, and the
level put into the process of in vitro fertilization can be seen as too much for one to handle,
especially if it fails. The procedure has too many cons and not enough pros. In conclusion,
fertility clinics should be regulated and be monitored with stricter guidelines. The fertility clinics
are left to figure out everything on their own without help from anyone. Each separate clinic has
to find their own funding, conduct their own experiments, and create their own set of rules and
regulations for their patients. If the government would take the time to lay out a set of rules,
boundaries, generic prices, and regulations for fertility clinics with in vitro fertilization across the
board, then they would become more successful and less risky.

Fairchild 5
Works Cited
Brownlee, Shannon. "Society Should Restrict 'Designer Baby' Technologies." Reproductive
Technologies. Ed. Clay Farris Naff. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2007. Opposing
Viewpoints. Rpt. from "Designer Babies." Washington Monthly (Mar. 2002). Opposing
Viewpoints in Context. Web. 19 Oct. 2015.
Cunningham, D. Scott. "Fertility Drugs and Cancer." Salem Health: Cancer. Ed. Jeffrey A.
Knight. Hackensack: Salem, 2008. n. pag. Salem Online. Web. 20 Oct. 2015.
IVF Mumma Vlogs. The Cost of IVF. Online Video Clip. Youtube. Youtube, June 11, 2013.
Nov. 12, 2015.
Kinsley, Michael. "Truly Sincere Opponents of Embryonic Stem Cell Research Would Also
Oppose IVF."Stem Cells. Ed. Jacqueline Langwith. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2012.
Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "A Breakthrough in the Stem Cell Debate." Daily
Beast 2009. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 29 Oct. 2015.fer
NewCarisa. What Did IVF Cost? Online Video Clip. Youtube. YouTube, Dec. 13, 2013. Oct.
29, 2015.