E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Kevin and Debra McCrea with (from left) Kerynn (6 months), Carter (6 years), and Hunter McCrea (7 years). After having three children, the McCreas donated their frozen embryos to other families going through IVF.
Carmen Olalde really wanted children. She went through years of infertility treatment and IVF, then a difficult pregnancy, to have her twins. And as her twins turned four, she realized that two kids were enough.
But she still had four frozen embryos from her last IVF cycle. And so she made a decision that put her at the frontier of reproductive ethics. She donated the embryos to a Virginia couple also suffering from infertility, whom she met via a website ad – on the condition that the donation be "open," and they send regular photos of any resulting child and hopefully keep in touch by e-mail and phone.
“My motherly part of me thinks that I think that I would at least want to know what happened to them, that it would hit me once in a while that I have these genetic children out there. But at least I will know that [the couple] Karolina and Oscar have them and that they’re happy, they’re OK,” says Olalde.
Meet the modern "open adoption" family -- at least two hopeful humans and one embryo, brought together by science, trust, complicated legalities and a goodly bit of luck.
Live Poll
If you had frozen embryos left over from IVF, would you donate them?
Many post-birth adoptions these days are “open,” in which the birth and adoptive families know each other’s name and perhaps have some degree of contact. Pre-birth arrangements may be following suit, though the law hasn't yet caught up.
Embryo donation has long been available at IVF clinics, but in the late 1990’s, embryo “adoption” agencies opened, with the goal of placing the roughly 500,000 unused frozen embryos in the U.S. with prospective families. Although they encourage open arrangements, most agencies leave that decision to the families involved.
Some open-donor recipients say they want the experience of being pregnant and giving birth, and for their children to know their biological origins. For their part, many donor parents say they were motivated to help out other parents.
“Parents have very challenging choices about what will happen to the rest of their embryos. In some cases, they couples may be moved by remembering the experience their own infertility,” says Connie Shapiro, author of "When You're Not Expecting: An Infertility Survival Guide."
The openness factor may also be the deciding factor for some donors on the fence. In most cases, the biological parents select the recipients.
The control factor appealed to Karolina Dembinska-Lemus and her husband Oscar, who received Olalde's frozen embryos. “For about three-and-a-half years we tried everything, domestic and international adoption and being foster parents. We had parents changing their minds left and right. It got to be too much,” she says.
She was also looking for embryos from Hispanic parents like the Olaldes; Oscar is from El Salvador. Embryo donation is also generally cheaper than finding an egg donor or a surrogate.
Still, embryo donation is relatively rare.
“The idea of someone else raising their genetic offspring is very hard for a lot of couples,” says Linda Applegarth, director of psychological services for The Center for Reproductive Medicine and Infertility in New York. And not everyone wants to stay in touch. “The couple I last met with wanted no knowledge of the recipients. They wanted to move on,” Applegarth says.
The donation arrangements are murky legally, as well as emotionally. Adoption laws only cover children already born, so families involved in embryo donation usually sign forms and contracts dictating "ownership" of the embryos, often hiring their own lawyers for private agreements. Some follow up with a legal adoption after a child is born to further secure their rights.
Margaret Swain, an attorney whose practice focuses on adoption and reproductive technology, says children born from donation will likely appreciate an open arrangement, even though parents might initially feel uncomfortable.
“Following the lessons learned from adoption, and what we are hearing from children born through gamete donation, some degree of openness is probably a good idea. Children born of gamete donation -- donation of either egg or sperm -- usually like to know more about the person who donated, or to meet that person,” she says.
Rebecca Hannafin of Portland, Ore., who has a newborn from an anonymous donor, says, “We'll be putting a letter in our file at the clinic to let the donating family know that we're open to contact. It's a long shot, but I do think we owe it to our daughter to try. I still believe that kids deserve as much information about their genetic origins as we can provide them.”
Debra McCrea of Grimes, Iowa says she felt on some level that embryos she donated were, after all, her children, which was why she chose to give them to a family rather than to science. She donated six embryos each to three different recipients -- one of whom she found on Craigslist.
“Although it would be awesome to have a chance to save somebody’s life through stem cell research, that’s not the reason we went into this. I wanted my kids to have a ton of siblings, but my husband and I couldn’t afford to have that many.
“There are some emotional ties there. But it’s a gift for us, because otherwise they wouldn’t have a chance to come to life to all,” she says.
More great stories from TODAY Moms:
Duggars talk about their next pregnancy
Study: Blogging makes new moms happy
IVF versus adoption: Why 'just adopt' is not the answer
What NOT to say to a woman who's had a miscarriage
"Like" TODAY Moms on Facebook, and follow us @TodayMoms
Leave a Comment:
I think this is great! Your embryos don't go to waste and a woman that probably really wants to experience pregnancy gets the chance!
Sure, until the donor wants to be a bigger part of that child's life; more than the "parents" are comfortable with. I can see a lawsuit brewing...
"Don't spank my child!"
"It's not your child!"
"Well, it was my embryo."
"Yeah, but I carried it and gave birth to it."
"And you think that makes you a mother!?!"
Good thing it does not work the way you guys think it does. A legal contract that is the same as an open adoption contract in the traditional adoption, and the person who gives birth to the child is the presumptive mother in all states. That woman's name goes on the birth certificate, and she would have to terminate her parental rights before the genetic parents could make a claim on the child. And this is the law in all 50 states.
Okay, maybe the open adoption part of it isn't a good idea, but donating your embryos to someone is. There just would need to be hard and fast rules about the adoption.
Why is the open part not a good idea? U
Pipsqueak, so-called "open adoptions" are only legal enforceable in a handful of states. It's not unusual for adoptive parents to agree to "open adoption" only to renege once they have their hot little hands on the baby. Many do, and the birthparents have no legal recourse. Read "Fast Track Adoption" sometime. The author tells parents all about how to navigate the system so they can win over the birthmother. She herself reneged on her open adoption agreement, and her birthmother, Cindy Jordan, committed suicide.
As I am pretty involved in the adoptive community, I know that as many open agreements fall apart due to the first parents change of life events. i.e. Many do not follow through with their end of the contract. It is a triad, and both the adult ends are equally likely to renege on the agreement. Also, as you note that these contracts are not legally enforceable, you should also note that the fear mongering of first parents will come back and try to parent your child is extremely inaccurate.
I would hope that there is some sort of record available, so one doesn't accidentally hook up with someone with sibling DNA.
I think all the embryos would go to the same person, so you wouldn't need to worry about thousands of half siblings out there accidentally hooking up. ALthough it does happen...
Nadya Suleman should have made the choice to donate at least six of her embryos. I can't imagine how she is coping with eight three-year-olds plus six other children.
Pretty soon you'll be able to say, "Yes, yes I know son, but I told you to never ever ever do that again. And you knew the punishment before you did it, but you did it anyway. Yes, yes I know that you are only 12 years old. Go get ready, you are going to be grounded for one year frozen in the basement."
(How is this not the same thing as maintaining a frozen embryo?)
I think it's a horrible idea. What if a woman goes through the whole ordeal and expense of pregnancy, and the biological "donors" demand their child back? It's a scandalous way to get a free surrogate.
They can draw up all the agreements they want beforehand, but it won't have teeth. Biological parents ultimately prevail in court if they really want, unless they are actually unfit to be parents at all. We see this all the time with traditional adoptions. They can draw up all the agreements they want, even paying the birthmother's medical expenses and certain other allowable expenses, but if she renegs after the birth anyway, it's adoptive parents who take the emotional, and often financial, toll.
Imagine how much worse it would be if you actually carried that child to term, rather than just building up emotional expectations. The first time this happens, it will surely put an end to embryo adoption at all - unless the laws are updated.
Women who donate their embryos, then want to be some secondhand tangential parent, can only be described with one word: psychopath.
A person who would rather have their embryos destroyed because ???? would be a tad selfish. And if you are a decent person, you would want to know if your embryo, niece, nephew, friend or even if it were a close neighbor, anyone you have some sort of connection with, is OK. That's a psychopath? Geez.
No, perhaps they are thinking about the adopted child, who may wish to be able to search someday. They should have that right.
Wow, judgmental much?
When one combines judgmentalism with ignorance, it's really breath-taking. Go read up about open adoption--because it actually works well when both sets of parents (those kind enough to give up a child for its own good and those who take on the herculean task of raising the child) are adults.
But, of course, I suppose it would take an adult to understand how that works.
If I donated embryos, I would feel responsible for them. My OB thought I had beautiful children and she wanted to have more children but couldn't. She wanted me to donate an embryo. She was serious and willing to pay for it. After 2 seconds of thought, I just couldn't imagine having biological children that were made of me and my husband, living elsewhere - even though I would know who had them. I'd still feel like I gave away my child. Couldn't do it.
I have 3 beautiful children and 2 frozen embryos. We can't afford to raise more and we are truly blessed and challenged with 3, so I am fully prepared to anonymously donate our 2 frozen embryos, so they can have a chance to bless and challenge two willing parents. I'm not crazy or selfish, I just can't imagine having more children or dumping the embryos down the drain.
We did IVF and have one lovely daughter and 4 frosties. Because of other events, I can't have another child. My husband and I are in the process of donating our embryos to another couple. We would like to have a semi-open situation for our daughter's sake in addition to any potential children that come from it. I think that any child would benefit from knowing his/her genetics, and my daughter would benefit from having someone else like her. The goal is NOT to be a second mommy. The embryos (and hopeful children) would have only one mother...the person who bore them (or if a gestational carrier was used the adoptive mother).
We're going into this hoping for the best...and I'm sure the embryos would be part of a loving family. There is a very small piece of me that is scared that they wouldn't be placed into a good home. We are selecting the embryo donation route over the embryo adoption route because of the high cost of the adoption proceedure for the intended parents. I strongly believe that we can't let our fears override the child's (children's) possiblity for life.
As someone who can't have kids, and really wants them, something like this would be a god-send. Until those 2 words entered into the contract "open donor". Ick. Sorry, but if I do ever get the chance to be a mother, that child will have one mommy, me. I would not be willing to share the experience with anyone - especially someone with a genetic claim. Too messy.
Don't you think your child should have the right to decide if THEY want to search someday? It has nothing to do with you. Don't try to own your adopted child. Please....from someone who went through that experience.
Why not say no contact with the child unless the child initiates contact - after age 16? I think it would be fair to ask the parents to send pictures or updates on occasion and keep a civil contact between the adults, even if the contact needs to go through a third party mediator.
The best interests of the child should outweigh the needs of the parents - either the parents that raise the child OR the genetic donors. Preventing a child from knowing and connecting to their genetic roots when that information is available is tantamount to lying to your child.
HHinson...since when do unborn children have rights? Once they're born, it shouldn't matter...the transaction occurred while they were 'unborn'. Yes...I'm being sarcastic everyone. I actually applaud the idea of the 'genetic' mother getting regular updates from the 'adoptive' mother. Even better is full contact, if possible.
I agree with Avalyn - every adopted child wants to know who their biological parents are. It's hard on the adoptive parents - but really - how many adopted children (unless they were mistreated) want to leave and go live with their biological parents? I just don't think that happens. The child is bonded with the people who raised them, and only curious about where they came from biologically.
You sound alot like those adoptive parents who ruin the lives of the children they adopt. Thank God you don't have any.
I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Adoptive parenting is no different (and should be no different) than biological parenting. I wouldn't want my child second-guessing who is their parent. I wouldn't to "answer to" a biological parent or account for how I raise the child. I certainly wouldn't want them becoming an alternate symbol of authority in the teen years, when parent-child tensions are common. Either be the parent to your embryos or don't. Asking someone else to do it for you on your terms is wrong. Now... exchanging pictures, videos, and updates would be fine. Meeting the child... that would be okay upon adulthood, maybe even a bit sooner if it's acceptable to the adoptive parent and child. But a truly "open" embryo adoption would undermine the adoptive parent/child relationship, I think. I mean, you don't see sperm donors demanding an active role! Embryo donation is essentially the same.
I would think that should the child EVER need it, they would have an option for a genetic match (possibly)....and if everyone is an adult and know firsthand the rules (and abide by them), shouldn't be a problem....
If people who do this are really responsible, they should only harvest enough eggs that they are going to use at any one time. I know this may mean repeat procedures, but if people are going to look upon these fertilized eggs as "people", then they need to think ahead of how many are you going to create. This is only logical and responsible.
Unfortunately, there is no way of knowing how many harvested eggs will yield viable embryos. My wife had 14 eggs harvested, yielding 3 viable embryos. One couple we adopted embryos from had 12 eggs harvested, yielding 10 viable embryos. Because the process is very invasive, carries inherent health risks, is incredibly expensive and often not covered by insurance, it just isn't practical or "logical" for a woman to harvest 1 or 2 eggs when more are available during the procedure.
I think there was an Australian couple that were killed in a traffic accident. They had frozen embryos. There was a legal battle over who their estate belonged to and whether the embryos should be grown in a surrogate so they could inherit the estate or if the embryos should be destroyed.
I'm not sure what became of that case.
Uh, no, not psychopath. Some people regard embryos as babies already and think it's sinning to donate them to science since they regard them as babies.
I think it's a good idea. I can sure see politics getting into this though.
I can see lawyers getting into this.
A donor who just magically wants to be part of the child or chilren's life. Oh sure, if the bay or babies (twins) are afflicted with some rare disorder or malady,then just watch her head for the escape hatch with an acute stage of amnesia.
We donated our remaining embryos, but not as an open adoption. They were donated to the IVF clinic so other couples who may not be able to have children could have the whole pregnancy experience. But, we will not know who received the embryos. I guess it is a "closed" adoption.
My wife and I received embryos in this manner. We will likely never know the genetic donors, but we are eternally grateful for their selfless act. We are so fortunate there are people like you who can anonymously give the ultimate gift and expect nothing in return but the feeling of knowing they gave their embryos a chance to experience life. Thank you. From us, our children, our extended family and friends, thank you!
Hey, maybe they were the same embryos!
There are two terms that are used...embryo adoption and embryo donation. I'm guessing that you completed an embryo donation. Embryo donations can be slightly open (contact after 18 years) or completely closed.
Embryo adoption (open or closed) includes the intended parents going through the same robust screening process adoptive parents go through. They require a homestudy and multiple other consultations.
Most clinics perfer the completely closed embryo adoption because it is easier and less mess for them.
Sure, people will support this until the 1st time a judge slaps the donating person with paternity.
Not going to happen you say. Guess what, it already has. In CA last year a judge ruled in favor of child support for a sperm donor (in the ruling the judge said the well being of the child was paramount over any agreement of the donor). FYI; a conservative judge before you blast the liberals.
Ah! But a CALIFORNIA conservative judge (isn't CA conservative an oxymoron??)
You can label the judge however you want; liberal, conservative, whatever. He still sounds like an idiot to me.
Yes, but that was a privately organized "donation," mind you. Sperm donations that go through a legitimate sperm bank do NOT come with paternity suits! And the nature of IVF prevents back alley embryo donations.
If anyone can talk about this topic, I can. . .My husband and I did every fertility treatment known to man. . .pills, shots, IUI & shots, and IVF. Nothing worked. Our fertility treatment told us to adopt another couple's embryo's. My husband said if we were going to adopt anything, it was going to be a baby born and that there was no need to make a baby when so many were in need. 6 mos later I got pregnant, but then had a 7 wk miscarriage. A wk or 2 after I finally had to have a D&C we received an email asking if we would adopt a baby to be born in 5 wks. She was born 11/1/11. We have an open relationship w/ the BM, but if I had adopted embryos and carried the baby, there's NO WAY, anyone else would be part of my baby's life. If you're willing to adopt out embryos, asking for more is silly. . .
You are thinking of this from your point of view, not the adopted child's.
I am sorry to hear of your miscarriage, that is very sad. It is wonderful that you have adopted a child. Consider your relationship with the birth mother. If you were the birth mother of donated embryos, would you not want to know what happens in your offspring's life? The difference between an embryo donor and a mother who carries to term is 9 months of pregnancy. But for the child there is no difference.
I would say there is a big difference. The connection to an egg donor is not as strong as the connection to a birthmother. Those 9 months have a lot of impact on development and possibly what a child ultimately becomes. Carrying a baby is a big responsibility and sacrifice. Genetic material, not so much. I think this is supported from the child's point of view by the fact that adopted children typically seek their birthmothers, not their biological fathers.
This world is a wonderful place to be,especially with all the freeeeedooooms and righhhhhts that we have! Anything is ok now so just do it! Right on.
I truly did not mean this to be taken seriously,I hope it wasn't!!
There's plenty of unwanted kids out there already born waiting to be adopted or fostered, what's wrong with them? With this method, the child would only be half of his biological parent set anyway. It's probably very dangerous for some of these women to be "forcing" pregnancy on their bodies when it wasn't equipped to be capable of that to begin with. To each their own I suppose.
There actually wouldn't be any biological connection as an embryo is already fertilised. This is equal to adopting a baby, it just hasn't been born yet.
The fact that the woman didn't get pregnant on her own doesn't mean it "isn't meant to be" or that they aren't equipped. That's one of the more cruel remarks that infertile couples endure. Some women have had endometriosis, or PCOS. Others want to avoid a genetic defect, so they use donor embryos. Also - PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE stop shoving traditional adoption in their faces. There are NOT thousands of kids out there waiting to be adopted, and adoption can cost more than fertility treatments. There are income levels and all sorts of hoops to jump through. You can be shut out by social services on the whim of a caseworker. I wish people who haven't been a part of the adoption triad would stop making ignorant remarks.
Baggage and bungie cords. There seems to always be some relative or friend who steps in to stop the adoption.
Look at the newspapers that have the "kid for adoption." Almost all of them have to keep some ties with some relative who couldn't care for them, have siblings that must also be adopted with them, and many require attention and therapy that most people would choose not to take on. Years ago a baby was found in a forest near here, miles from nowhere and was place with a family, and if the mom suddenly showed up, having been kidnapped by aliens, there would be a mess.
HHinson:
hmmm....
= it isn't meant to be.
= they aren't equipped mentally to handle parenthood
So if someone has a family history of, say, cleft palate and the parents choose to not have a child have to go through years and years of painful surgery and ridicule, that makes them mentally handicapped????
JM - are you against all adoption or just the adoption of embryos?
Yes Cat, that is what I am saying. I think their mental perception of a human being is flawed. Let's keep using your cleft palate example: this is where designer babies are coming into play. Who is anyone to say what "flaw" would cause ridicule? Red hair? Black hair? Brown hair? Kids are cruel animals who will prey upon any "weaker" child. It is the positive parenting and efforts put in by those parents that determine a child's strength, not what the child looks like. And as for cleft palates, those are easily remedied here in the United States quite quickly; not years and years.
I do wish more people would consider adoption, but again that is where another angle of the designer baby argument comes in. Science created a new Pandora's box by tinkering with the creation of life. The fact that the government makes it so difficult to adopt is another discussion that would take up page after page.
I'm curious where all these unwanted kids are who are available for adoption. The infertile couples I know all spent years and 6 figures to arrange an adoption. And many of them adopted babies with problems attributed to gestation (fetal alcohol syndrome, drug abuse by birthmother). Foster children have their own issues, such as families that keep taking them back! Adoptive parents just want a shot at raising a healthy child that they can keep. Nope, not a guarantee of health, just a chance. A baby who wasn't injured by completely preventable prenatal factors that make for a difficult and expensive upbringing. Good luck finding and affording a newborn like that!
My niece was born with a severe cleft lip and palate. She is now 16 and still has at least one more surgery in her future. So yes, it is years and years of pain, surgery, suffering, and humiliation at the hands of others.
I have some friends who adopted a baby because he has a hereditary seizure disorder. Not wanting to pass that on, doesn't make them mentally deficient, it makes them responsible.
The government does make it very difficult (and expensive) to adopt and I wish that could be changed. Yet another friend adopted a baby and they spent in excess of $150,000 in legal fees.
Later this week, my husband and i will be releasing our legal rights to our "extra" embryos. We've found a wonderful couple who have tried everything and cannot have a child. They will be hiring a gestational carrier for the pregnancy. The parents-to-be will be this child's parents, 100%. My husband and I have 2 beautiful kids, our lives are full, and we wish to pay-it-forward. For the emotional health of our children and any children that are born of our "extra's", we have made an "open" arrangement with the other couple. We hope that the kids will be friends and all of the parents have the same ideal to support/facilitate whatever kind of relationship that is in the children's best interest. We feel fantastic offering this gift and feel like everyone is winning. My kids will have more relations to love and play with - both the kids and the parents. Love makes a family.
You really do have a kind heart, and an open mind... unlike a lot of posters here.
Oh bs.Your "open mind " many consider abomination,religious views aside
You donated your "extra" embryos to a couple who have hired a gestational carrier? Swell. Now could you narrow down who LEGALLY are the parents-to-be? Obviously you and your husband have parented these embryos, but wait...will the gestational carrier suddenly develop "maternal" feelings during the term of her incubating services? Or will the other "parents-to-be" divorce in a few years and get remarried, then will be the young CONFUSED child will then have 4-6 "mommies?"
This gets more ridiculous on a daily basis.
I see a new cult in the making.
Why do people take something as kind as donating your embryos and/or womb and turn it into something ugly. The gestational surrogate knows what she's getting into and knows that it's not her baby in any way. And much like an infant that has been adopted has a birth mother and father, these embryos will have a biological mother and father.
The whole point in using donated embryos (if you cannot use your own) for a surrogate is to ensure the adoptive parents' parental rights. If the surrogate is biologically related to the child, then she can change her mind and keep the baby. There have been a few sad cases of this happening. But with a donated embryo, they only have to worry about the biological parents (who, in this case, are apparently low-risk). There was the other recent case where a woman was mistakenly implanted with the wrong embryo and she had to give up the baby after the pregnancy. But I think it's much more of a risk if the adopted baby is both biologically related AND carried by the same surrogate. That's why.
JLM the whole point of donating embryos is to a) prevent destruction of the embryo and b) allow a childless family to have a child. Now, if you are a parent, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that you might want your other children to maintain contact with the adopted child, or you might want to be there to help that adopted child should he/she need support outside of the adopted child's circle upon request.
There are adoptive parents willing to do that... if not, they have other options.
Yes, those are reasons to donate embryos, but I was referring to JmB66's comment. The reason for choosing a surrogate that is unrelated to the embryo would be primarily a legal one, to prevent the surrogate from having parental rights with which she might change her mind and decide to keep their baby.
a couple might also hire a surrogate to carry donated embryos if the woman doesn't have her uterus and ovaries due to a previously resolved health issue or if the couple are 2 men.
Yeah. All reasons to donate embryos. All reasons to hire a surrogate. Custodial concerns would be the reason to do BOTH.
When I had embryos left over after a successful ivf pregnancy, I donated to them to science. Because I was over 35, I did not have the choice to donate them to another woman or couple. It was either scientific research or the trash.
If the embryos are babys, the hom do you sign an ownership contract? (Are we dealing with slavery again?)
It's still an adoption.
Adoptive parents of ALL kinds - traditional or embryo - need to understand that "your" child really isn't "yours." It does have another set of parents, and quit taking it personally if they want to look for the other set. It doesn't mean they aren't well-adjusted, or they don't love you. It's a natural curiosity that has NOTHING to do with how they were raised, and everything with wanting to know about where you come from. The child should have a right to know this if they wish. Stop trying to treat your child like a possession, and remember that it's a person.
Better be careful, there is that one lady that sued for child support for sperm she got out of a spermbank and won. They sperm donor now has to pay child support. This could happen here just as easily.
Embryo adoption/donation are heavily regulated by the same laws that govern tissue and organ donation. Sperm donation is not. So, it could not happen "just as easily."
If there is a way, someone will find it, just to make money.
What are you talking about?
Are you a blackmarket organ seller, Richard?
Oh just think of all the lucky uh "homosexuals" ICK,barren by nature is barren
This should tell you that in their heart of hearts mothers know that embryos really are people.
Coming from someone that had a difficult time having a child I think the embryo donation is amazing and a gift that person will forever be greatful for. As far as having a type of open adoption deal I think that is ridiculous that is probably going to lead to some kind of issue.
Sounds like mess of trouble for all involved.. What if the kid turns out to be a Ted Bundy or an Eileen Wournos.. What if the kid turns out to be the person who discovers the cure for cancer and makes a kazillion dollars.. The donors would surely want a share.. Heck I'd want a share just for my comment, here.. The donors should just be happy they helped other people enjoy having a child..
I suffered infertility for years before finally having two beautiful children, so I know how precious motherhood is. I donated my "leftover" frozen embryos anonymously. I hope someone out there was able to have a baby/babies from them and has found as much love and fulfillment as I have with my children. I don't want to know what happened w/ the embryos, but I hope it was something wonderful.
i think its a cool idea one couple getting to help out some other couple who is having trouble to have a family be able too. at least till the republicans start screaming about it and try to ban it .
Republicans are all about adoption. They'd be "screaming" about discarding the embryos, which is the IVF equivalent of abortion.
Not only that, the repubs would also love for us to become the new "old Romania" with outlawed abortion, so that we too can have too many children in the street and foster homes with a crumbled society that has no money..... such a pretty picture.
In this litigious society we have, I envision a scenario where an adopted embryo is eventually born with a birth defect - then watch the blame game, responsibility assignment be thrust upon the genetic parents. Sorry - too complicated - unless it's a close family member, I think it's a high-risk proposition.
And the hyprocisy of it all rolls on. Nothing further need be said.