snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > SLC Central > Hurricane Katrina

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 05 January 2007, 09:26 PM
kismet kismet is offline
 
Join Date: 30 September 2003
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, TX
Posts: 4,703
Default

[QUOTE=Mickey Blue;9065]I wasn't suggesting you shouldn't be sad or that invitro fertilization is wrong, just the generic attitude of "I can't have a baby on my own and the only way to have one is to go through this procedure" is kinda a slap to all the orphan kids out there.. If you want a kid who is "your own flesh and blood" then yea, adopting wont help, if you want to actually carry the baby then yea, adoption wont help, but if you just want a child to raise adoption not only can help but there are already kids out there who need homes.
[QUOTE]

See, I see it differently for the OP. They aren't saying that going through this procedure is the only way to have a kid. They are saying that they already went through this procedure and to get to the same point where they already had been (with an embryo frozen and waiting for them) would cost a huge amount of time, money, pain, etc. And it would cost a huge amount of time, money, pain, etc. to start the adoption process if that embryo was lost, too.

Which is no different from a person who is adopting and has the process interupted saying that to start the whole process over again would be really hard. Being near the end of a difficult process and circumstances sending you back to square one is frustrating, even if there are other alternative processes you could start from square one instead!
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 05 January 2007, 09:39 PM
Mickey Blue's Avatar
Mickey Blue Mickey Blue is offline
 
Join Date: 01 February 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 17,571
Default

Quote:
But if the embryos had thawed, each woman who wanted another baby would have had to undergo another expensive round of fertility drugs, egg harvesting, and in vitro fertilization. Markham estimated her first pregnancy cost $12,000; the second $2,000. Her husband's insurance covered that, but had a lifetime cap of $15,000.
Eh, I guess its mostly semantics, and a general annoyance I have about the concept which to be fair not all but many people have that adoption is just not an option..

Agree to disagree I suppose, still I'm happy these people are happy.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05 January 2007, 09:43 PM
Gibbie's Avatar
Gibbie Gibbie is offline
 
Join Date: 20 February 2000
Location: Evansville, IN
Posts: 8,510
Default

The word "just" should never be used with the word "adoption." Adoption is long, difficult, expensive process. Not everyone is eligible. Many people like to say of infertile couples "well you could just adopt a needy child" as if someone is standing out on the street corner handing out kids. It just doesn't work that way and you devalue the efforts of those that do adopt by making it sound as if I can pick one up the next time I head to Schnuck's.

Gibbie
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 06 January 2007, 02:25 PM
Christie Christie is offline
 
Join Date: 28 November 2001
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 30,909
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mickey Blue View Post
Eh, I guess its mostly semantics, and a general annoyance I have about the concept which to be fair not all but many people have that adoption is just not an option..
Not to pick at you Micky but really why do so many people insist that adoption is an option *for others* yet remain either childless or choose to have biological children *for themselves*? It's pretty presumptuous of you (general you) IMO if you yourself are not an adoptive parent (and no talking vaguely about how "some day I will probably adopt" doesn't count) to keep insisting that people who don't think of adoption as an option are somehow less worthy. And that's exactly how this comes across.

Last edited by Christie; 06 January 2007 at 02:38 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 06 January 2007, 02:46 PM
Sara@home's Avatar
Sara@home Sara@home is offline
 
Join Date: 18 March 2004
Location: Reading, PA
Posts: 12,468
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryda Wong, EBfCo. View Post
At which time, there were still stranded people, as well as many stranded pets, who, once again, are alive. And, even if it only took ten people, it still took money and resources (which are still needed by the actual victims of the hurricane) to recover something that does no one any real good whatsoever.
That is so bogus. It was the mismanagement of the rescue effort that caused people to be stranded two weeks after the storm, not efforts like this. At least these people rescued something of value rather than sitting around waiting for direction.

As for comparing it to rescuing pets, the embryos were sitting in one place, didn't run and hide, were relatively easy to rescue in a short amount of time. And, there was someplace to take them once they were rescued.

Quote:
Granted. I'll change that to the Dr. who called her legislative buddy, who used political clout to get this done, when resources could have been allocated elsewhere.
Well, at least someone got something done.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 06 January 2007, 02:52 PM
Sara@home's Avatar
Sara@home Sara@home is offline
 
Join Date: 18 March 2004
Location: Reading, PA
Posts: 12,468
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mickey Blue View Post
but if you just want a child to raise adoption not only can help but there are already kids out there who need homes.
People want babies. They want to start at the beginning of raising a child with a baby. There aren't babies out there needing homes. Babies get adopted as soon as they are available for adoption.

Adopting a child who is older is a far different task than starting with a baby.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 08 January 2007, 04:35 AM
MapleLeaf's Avatar
MapleLeaf MapleLeaf is offline
 
Join Date: 17 September 2003
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 13,714
Default

Quote:
Well thats mean.. I mean surely somebody out there named Katrina has done something valuable.. Hope a hurricane called "Mike" dosn't level a city somewhere..
Tell me about it. When I was in grade 6 I took all sorts of jibes for Hurricane Mitch.

I just got back from New Orleans, actually, and let me tell you all that it is horrific. It looks like no one has touched the houses since the hurricane. I was doing some gutting, siding, and cleaning with a youth group. It was just unbelievable, the mess. I have a lot of pictures, and I will post them when I have a chance.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 08 January 2007, 04:24 PM
kismet kismet is offline
 
Join Date: 30 September 2003
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, TX
Posts: 4,703
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sara@home View Post
People want babies. They want to start at the beginning of raising a child with a baby. There aren't babies out there needing homes. Babies get adopted as soon as they are available for adoption.

Adopting a child who is older is a far different task than starting with a baby.
Yes, and even if a couple is ok with bringing a school-aged child into the family (because waiting kids for adoption are mostly over the age of 6), it's not really even that easy. Because a child who has lived in foster care or a neglectful/abusive home for 6 years or has just been orphaned is more challenging to parent than most kids that age. So you have to be ready for that challenge if you adopt a waiting child.

And we were told that to adopt a healthy single child, we pretty much had to foster to adopt. So we needed to prepare ourselves to care for and love a young child with the 50/50 chance that we could lose that child. And that's if we met the criteria. Because I was also told they might not approve me since hubby and I work. And another woman I know who doesn't work was told she absolutely couldn't foster to adopt because her rottweiler (a therapy dog at the pediatric unit of the local charity hospital) was a vicious breed.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 08 January 2007, 09:54 PM
Pseudo_Croat
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hopefully, if it's a girl, the mother will have sense enough not to call her Katrina.

- Pseudo (it's a miracle - times two) Croat
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 08 January 2007, 10:26 PM
ThistleS's Avatar
ThistleS ThistleS is offline
 
Join Date: 09 November 2005
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 9,102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mickey Blue View Post


Or.. They could just adopt one of the tons of needy kids, yes including very young ones, that are already available.
Really? They are? Can you get me one, please?
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 16 January 2007, 01:04 PM
Sara@home's Avatar
Sara@home Sara@home is offline
 
Join Date: 18 March 2004
Location: Reading, PA
Posts: 12,468
Default

It's a boy. Named Noah.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 16 January 2007, 02:58 PM
Mickey Blue's Avatar
Mickey Blue Mickey Blue is offline
 
Join Date: 01 February 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 17,571
Default

Quote:
Not to pick at you Micky but really why do so many people insist that adoption is an option *for others* yet remain either childless or choose to have biological children *for themselves*?
Again, and I have said time and again its semantics, my beef is not with people who go through these procedures to have children, my beef is with the statements some people make that its the only way to have kids.. Perhaps my point is simply not transmitting well to text, or I'm not writing it out well, I dont know.

I'm not against childbirth, nor am I against the methods used in the OP, just the attitude of "well this is the only way for us to get a child of our own".


Sort of like if somebody said "well there is no way for me to get around unless I have a car". There are tons of ways, though perhaps less convinient. And I am not against cars, just the presumption that they are the only way to go.


However as its clear its not coming across, or going over well, I will drop the argument.

Quote:
Really? They are? Can you get me one, please?
I cannot but I presume if you talk to one of the many programs out there they can help you out, depending on what you are looking for. Or you can use one of the many other methods to have/get a child, nothing wrong with that, mearly the presumption that the only way to have a child is to physically carry it yourself.

-MB
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 16 January 2007, 05:56 PM
ThistleS's Avatar
ThistleS ThistleS is offline
 
Join Date: 09 November 2005
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 9,102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mickey Blue View Post
I cannot but I presume if you talk to one of the many programs out there they can help you out, depending on what you are looking for. Or you can use one of the many other methods to have/get a child, nothing wrong with that, mearly the presumption that the only way to have a child is to physically carry it yourself.

-MB
Actually, as has been pointed out to me (on the old board), it's something of a myth that there are tons of kids just older than infancy waiting to be adopted in this country. From what I understand there is only a surplus of children waiting to be adopted age 6 and older- hardly "very young."

Adopting children from other countries is hardly an option for as many people for whom fertility treatments are an option. Mexico, for example, requires that prospective adoptive parents live in Mexico for a minimum of 6 months, unless they can get a judge to give them a waiver.

I just wanted to point out that adoption is not some simple, easy alternative. It's something that people choose because it's what is right for them, not because it's easier or better than other methods.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 16 January 2007, 07:49 PM
Mickey Blue's Avatar
Mickey Blue Mickey Blue is offline
 
Join Date: 01 February 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 17,571
Default

Well this is indeed why I like snopes, I learn new things on a fairly consistant basis.

While the base statement and general attitude I mentioned may still bother me on some level, I will conceed that adoption is far from a simple process and is unlikely to offer the experiance of raising a child from infanacy, or even todler..cy...

-MB
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 18 January 2007, 03:36 AM
Sara@home's Avatar
Sara@home Sara@home is offline
 
Join Date: 18 March 2004
Location: Reading, PA
Posts: 12,468
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow View Post
I love how people and pets were stranded and ignored following Katrina, but efforts were not spared for some potential humans. I'm sure the people who were refused help and the families of those who died aren't happy about this woman who is giving birth to a rescued cell. People make me sick sometimes the way they value potential lives over existing ones.
Did you read the earlier posts? These embryos were recovered about two weeks after the hurricane. As I said earlier, as for comparing it to rescuing pets, the embryos were sitting in one place, didn't run and hide, were relatively easy to rescue in a short amount of time. And, there was someplace to take them once they were recovered.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 18 January 2007, 04:44 AM
Mickey Blue's Avatar
Mickey Blue Mickey Blue is offline
 
Join Date: 01 February 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 17,571
Default

Quote:
I love how people and pets were stranded and ignored following Katrina, but efforts were not spared for some potential humans. I'm sure the people who were refused help and the families of those who died aren't happy about this woman who is giving birth to a rescued cell. People make me sick sometimes the way they value potential lives over existing ones.
Coming into a thirteen page thread and not reading all of it is probably fair.. Coming into a two page one and not reading it is lazy.

This topic has been covered in depth, though Sara gave the rundown.

-MB
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 18 January 2007, 03:14 PM
Christie Christie is offline
 
Join Date: 28 November 2001
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 30,909
Default

Quote:
And FYI, I did read some of the recent previous posts
Selective reading of posts doesn't go over well here at snopes. FYI No one is asking you to change your mind, but it would be a good idea to base your opinion on what actually happened rather than what you think happened.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 18 January 2007, 03:54 PM
Sara@home's Avatar
Sara@home Sara@home is offline
 
Join Date: 18 March 2004
Location: Reading, PA
Posts: 12,468
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow View Post
I simply do not see the point in rescuing a bunch of these "snowflake" babies, or whatever cutesy name they've been given. Whether these things were in one place or scattered all over the state, I would think the people who are living and functional would be a first priority. They were rescued two week after the storm...how about all the people who weren't rescued until long after that, or the ones who were not rescued at all? And what about the doctors and search dogs being turned away to find the injured and dead? I feel so bad for the people who suffered through that tragedy, especially the ones who were considered second-best to a clump of cells.
It's faulty logic to assume that the people securing the embryos would have been rescuing people or pets in the time they were spending getting the embryos. The management of that disaster was so poor and illogical that no one can make a valid assumption of what wasn't rescued because the embryos were.

And while you don't see the point, many people do. That's your anti-child, anti-parent bias coming to the fore again.

ETA: We've been using the term "embryo".
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 18 January 2007, 10:46 PM
Sara@home's Avatar
Sara@home Sara@home is offline
 
Join Date: 18 March 2004
Location: Reading, PA
Posts: 12,468
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow View Post
My feelings on parents and children have nothing to do with this topic. I made my statement from a moral point of view. Dive down my throat about this if you choose, but I found it ridiculous that any effort or money was spared to rescue a bunch of embryos.
Does the nasty, hateful tone have nothing to do with the very clear feelings you express about parents and children?

Quote:
And, FYI again, I did read the story both here and on another forum. So please refrain from telling me what I have and have not read.
1. I didn't tell you what you read or didn't read. I asked. There is a big difference.

2. You already admitted to Christie that you hadn't read the whole thread:
Quote:
And FYI, I did read some of the recent previous posts.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 19 January 2007, 07:11 PM
Mickey Blue's Avatar
Mickey Blue Mickey Blue is offline
 
Join Date: 01 February 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 17,571
Default

Quote:
My feelings on parents and children have nothing to do with this topic. I made my statement from a moral point of view. Dive down my throat about this if you choose, but I found it ridiculous that any effort or money was spared to rescue a bunch of embryos.
Even if you were view them as not alive in any sense of the word they still made for potential life and failing everything else they were peoples treasured (and very expensive) property. They used their connections to get them "rescued", whether its good or bad that they were able to use said connections where as a poor person could not is a resonable topic, and this is hardly the only time that comes into play (see also; getting good jobs, getting a good education, etc, etc) but they did not use rescuers who would necessarily have been doing anything else..

Quote:
And, FYI again, I did read the story both here and on another forum. So please refrain from telling me what I have and have not read.
Nobody has suggested you didn't read the OP, what they (and I) have suggested, and seems to have bore out, is that you did not read any, or at least not all, of the responses or you would have seen that the points you are bringing up have been covered already.. And some stupid stupid person got into a breif argu-scussion about adoption only to be set streight by smarter individuals.

ETA: In fact, looking back, the second post made said basically the same thing you did (though more tactfully) in your first post.. So clearly you didn't even make it that far as to see your point had already been made.

-MB
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.