Controlling the means of reproduction

Share on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someoneTweet about this on Twitter

The title says it all, Should Obese, Smoking and Alcohol Consuming Women Receive Assisted Reproduction Treatment? The press release is based on a position statement from the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. The link is here (not live yet).



  1. The real question is why a woman would be willing to spend the large amount of money to use reproductive technology to have a kid if she cannot be troubled to change her personal habits (at low or no cost to herself) such as to effect a healthier pregnancy and child? This makes no sense to me.

  2. Depends on whether she is willing and able to pay for it. I certainly don’t want to have to. There are plenty of alcohol drinking, smoking, fat people who are a benefit to society that I wouldn’t make a broad statement banning reproduction.

  3. If it were just about the health and life outcomes for the kids, you’d want to exclude older women as well (and you could even make a statistical case for race-based discrimination, if you wanted to go there). The set of risk factors here is chosen to support a puritanical agenda.

  4. since when do people do things because they make sense?

  5. as long as the taxpayer doesnt have to foot the bill 
    ( and imho there is no reason that asssisted reproductive tyechnologies should be paid for by anyone other than the recepient of the ivf or whatever) 
    but as long as patient is paying for treatment independently-denying her care is patronizing , paternalistic, presumptuous and frankly bordering on fascist. 
    most task forces i have worked with are comprised ofegocentric hubristic morons who are not smart enough to comprehend the limits of their knowledge or wisdom. 
    in general ethics task forces compound those sins exponentially.