One Step Forward; Two Steps Backward

Lois M. Scheel

1994

Published in:

The Northwest Technocrat Newsletter, Feb 1994, No. 121

At a time when new methods of education regarding birth control should head our priority list, news headlines read differently:

Answered prayers; six babies in 14 months: Spokane, WA.--"Two years ago a woman prayed she would have a baby. Now she has her wish six times over. After taking a fertility drug, she gave birth to quadruplets in June 1992. (This past August, she and her husband had twins, not due to fertility pills.)

"The mother took Clomid, a drug that stimulates the pituitary gland to produce hormones needed for ovulation. Seventeen weeks into her pregnancy, she developed gestational diabetes, and her legs atrophied so much she could barely walk.

"The quadruplets spent four weeks in intensive care. The mother's health insurance covered nearly all the medical costs of almost $400,000.

"The lucky parents are not without help. They live with the mother's parents, and all four grandparents and a part-time nanny pitch in with the chores. Cribs and strollers and donated time from coworkers, neighbors and friends help to ease the burden."

(Excerpted from Associated Press, 12-28-93)

Woman has twins--at age 59: London--"A 59-year-old British woman gave birth to twins on Christmas Day, becoming the oldest woman on record to have a child. She was artificially impregnated with eggs from a younger woman. She will be 69 when her daughters are 10 years old. The British woman was turned down for fertility treatment by the ethics committee, which ruled she was too old for the emotional strain of pregnancy. But she refused to give up and consulted an Italian doctor who specializes in helping women who have gone through menopause have children. He has helped 35 women aged 48 to 55 to become mothers."

(Excerpted from Associated Press, 12-27-93)

Excerpted from Dear Abby: "...I have agreed to become a surrogate mother for a married woman who has unsuccessfully tried to have a baby for 10 years. The egg and sperm will be the other couple's; they are just using my body as an incubator.

"I will be paid $5,000 when my pregnancy is confirmed, and $5,000 after the baby is born.

"Abby, your column isn't long enough to describe the emotional abuse my mother has put me through since all this started. She asked me if I had lost my mind and made it clear that she didn't want to see me in this condition with someone else's baby."

Abby's answer: "Surrogate motherhood is not about renting one's womb; it's about helping a woman fulfill her dream of motherhood." (December 28, 1993)

In spite of extensive scientific studies that have proved that overpopulation puts a serious strain on our natural nonrenewable resources, and in spite of the studies that show explicitly that if this trend continues, our resources will not be able to sustain such a burden, doctors of science are coming up with exciting ways to give childless couples not just one child but twins, quadruplets, quintuplets. The waifs already born and living in poverty hardly get a glance, but just let parents produce multiple births and the helping hand is out. The media plays up the importance of such a stupendous occasion in grand style.

A doctor of science can now help over-age women have babies by impregnating them with a younger woman's eggs. Twins yet. Never mind the mother may not remain in good health to raise her children. She may not even live to see them grow up.

And there is no end to the innovations of the Price System. To make a little extra cash, productive surrogate mothers are helping other parents build up their ego by producing their very own child whose seeds have been implanted inthis surrogate's womb. Abby calls it helping a woman fulfill her dream of motherhood. If there were no money involved, would the surrogate mother be so helpful?

In the case of the parents of quadruplets and twins, just imagine an insurance company paying the expenses of parents who purposely get themselves in a bind. That $400,000 would have gone a long way in helping six babies already here and in need. Of course, the intelligent way in this age of information would be to not produce unwanted babies and to limit family production to replacing the parents.

Scientists could use their expertise in improving life already on planet earth instead of searching for it in the heavens. Always we are searching for and praising new life instead of seeing the importance of improving life for those already here. Without a qualm, we send our best minds and bodies to war and then extol the virtue of an unborn fetus, its future status unknown.

Isn't it time that we stop trying to emulate an unprovable ancient history book by not going forth and multiplying and by not subduing the earth? We're talking about survival here.