Poll: Would You Freeze Your Eggs?
Posted by: Catherine Strawn
Filed in:
news, polls
10:15AM, Wednesday May 6th 2009
In Newsweek, Rachel Lehmann-Haupt shares how she decided to have some of her eggs frozen at 37. After a relationship ended, Rachel wanted to have kids of her own at some point in the future, but she worried her time might be running out, since doctors say 35 is the age after which fertility tends to drop. With money inherited from her grandmother, she had the procedure, and eight of her mature eggs are being stored for the day when she finds a man to fertilize them.
Lehmann-Haupt speculates freezing eggs could affect women’s lives. “I think that like birth control or abortion, egg freezing could also change society. It is a choice, another tool by which women are able to assert control over their bodies.” The prohibitive cost (around $15,000 plus $400 per year for storing the eggs) prevents the majority of us from having our eggs frozen for later use, but someday, as science progresses, this could change. Is this something you would do? Do you think freezing your eggs would help you feel like you have more control over your life? Would it take away some of the pressure we feel to find a man and make babies before a certain age? [Newsweek via Salon Broadsheet]
TheFrisky.com is part of the Turner Sports and Entertainment Digital Network
WinkyFace
wrote on May 6 2009 @ 10:48 am: [report]
I’ve already had this conversation with my ex-boyfriend. We both hope to be with each other again one day, but right now our lives are in 2 different places. We discussed how we don’t want to have kids for another 10 years, but that would put me into the “danger zone” where my eggs would apparently not be as viable as they are now. If I had $15k, I’d definitely freeze some eggs now as a back-up. Surprisingly, he is all for it, too. Anyone have $14,500 to spare? I’m a little short.
Perceptible
wrote on May 6 2009 @ 10:50 am: [report]
That’s a tough one, especially for me who had a biological child at 32, then divorced, but knew I wanted more children. I never even considered in-vitro or egg storage. With so many children already born who need homes, adoption was clearly the right answer for me. My daughter was born when I was 37, and came home when I was 38. I am now the proud, happy — and single — mother of two beautiful children.
laura
wrote on May 6 2009 @ 10:55 am: [report]
actually, i totally would. it is like insurance. i have read that it is the age of the egg that is more important than the age of the mother, so if i am pushing the envelope of optimal baby producing years, i don’t have a problem with using science as a backup. i have also read that it is better to freeze the egg post fertilization, so i think that i would prefer to do that.
Tamara
wrote on May 6 2009 @ 01:21 pm: [report]
I would for the simple fact that who knows what the future holds? I’m not with anyone now, and at this point I don’t know when I’ll be ready to dive into another long term relationship. I’m 23 now so I have some time, but I’m not sure I want children and with the women in my family that have succumb to various forms of cancer I’d rather be safe than sorry in the long run.
joyy
wrote on May 6 2009 @ 01:49 pm: [report]
Nope. For that kind of money you could adopt on the off chance that I change my mind “once it’s too late.” Then again, I’ve always been more for adopting than spending money to produce your own. *shrug*
snap
wrote on May 6 2009 @ 02:04 pm: [report]
i don’t know. it really only buys you a few more years. your body ages along with your eggs, and pregnancy is higher risk the older you are. plus, there are so many issues that come up with beginning your family in your middle age.
retro chic
wrote on May 6 2009 @ 02:28 pm: [report]
No. Adopt instead. I echo “Perceptible” 100%. The Golden Egg (pictured) imo, is a goose egg for all the trouble, cost and karma of what is ordinarily an organic life process, when already born children need loving homes.
40yrolddad
wrote on May 6 2009 @ 02:28 pm: [report]
hate to be the bearer of bad news but having gone through infertility treatments I can tell you that unless there’s been some major breakthroughs in the last five years (possible) freezing (actually thawing) women’s eggs has a FAR lower success rate than sperm or fertilized embryos. it’s definitely better than your chances if you don’t (i.e. zero) but the procedure is (or used to be) far from reliable. in ‘02 we attended a lecture by Dr Michael Tucker, one of the top embryologists in the world and among the 1st to successfully fertilize thawed eggs (who happens to be here in Atlanta), where he explained it. I forget the exact reasons but it has something to do with the physical structures in the egg that hold the chromosones (spindelettes? forget exact term) that don’t tolerate freezing/thawing well. even if you successfully fertilize & transfer you’re still facing the odds of carrying an IVF to term (which vary by age & a bunch of other stuff).
I’m not trying to discourage anyone, just don’t want people to think it’s a “get of of biological realities free” card - you’re odds are better than zero but far from 100%... that said, look it up - there may have been major advances since we were patients…
Backliteyes
wrote on May 6 2009 @ 09:32 pm: [report]
No. I think people are too hung up on having their own kids. If you can’t get around to it before 40, clearly it wasn’t as much a priority for you as other things.
I also have a hard time swallowing the idea that people can’t manage to find someone they’re willing to have kids with over the expanse of 20 years (from 20-40). You’re either not trying or you’re taking too much time off enjoying being single, not wanting to start a family in graduate school, or whatever people do other than settle down between 20 and 40.
mountaingrrl
wrote on May 7 2009 @ 08:49 am: [report]
I’m just wondering what happened to adopting when you weren’t able to have your own children. $15,000 is a lot of money on something that “may or may not” work as planned. There are tons of kids out there that need good homes and instead of meeting the great potential parents that I know are out there, they sit waiting for the system to kick them out on the street when they turn 18. I think the golden egg in this article is another way of representing the “bigger, better, faster, more” lifestyle that so many people have been sucked into to. Although with this one it seems to be “bigger, better, older, longer, ...wait-I need you to get my walker so we can go to the hospital I’m in labor!!” people just keep getting crazier and crazier.